
Negligence for the January 2023 rear-end collision was admitted, leaving causation and the extent of Plaintiff’s claimed injuries and damages as the central issues at trial.
Following the collision, Plaintiff initially treated for lower back complaints with medication, chiropractic care, and an injection. She was discharged with approximately $19,252.67 in medical expenses and did not seek further treatment for the alleged injuries until after a subsequent automobile accident in 2024. Plaintiff then underwent extensive treatment in 2025 and 2026 — medication, chiropractic care, physical therapy, and injections — and attributed that treatment, along with more than $114,000 in claimed medical expenses, to the 2023 collision.
At trial, Plaintiff testified that she experienced continuous pain after the 2023 collision and relied on medication rather than seeking additional treatment until her symptoms became unbearable. Plaintiff’s mother also offered emotional testimony regarding the changes she observed in Plaintiff following the accident. Plaintiff introduced photographs of the vehicle damage, the accident report, her medical records and bills, and medical narratives from her treating providers. In closing, Plaintiff asked the jury to award $120,000 for past and future medical expenses and $300,000 for pain and suffering, for a total amount of $420,000.
The Defense focused the jury on the substantial gap in Plaintiff’s treatment, the intervening 2024 automobile accident, and the absence of persuasive evidence connecting Plaintiff’s 2025–2026 treatment to the 2023 collision. The Defense argued that Plaintiff had not met her burden of proving that the later treatment and claimed damages were caused by the accident at issue. In closing the Defense argued that the most the jury should award was $19,252.67 for the treatment in the three months following the accident.
After deliberation, the jury returned a total favorable defense verdict of $20,000 — a significant reduction from both Plaintiff’s claimed medical expenses and the damages requested at trial and almost exactly the amount the defense suggested during closing.
The case is Merritt v. Williams, State Court of Fulton County, Case No. EV000051.
Click on a link to read more about Associate Attorneys Gina Mackey and Nathalia Guerra.
Read more about GMKE at http://www.gmke.law. Follow GMKE on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram.