M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Home
Verdicts
and
Decisions
Search Database
Recent Cases
Cases By Subject
Report A Case
Lawyers
Search Directory
By State & City
Add A
Lawyer Listing
Court
Reporters
Recent Listings
Search
By States & City
Add A Basic
Reporter Listing
Expert
Witnesses
Recent Listings
Search Directory
By State & Expertise
Add A Basic
Expert Witness
Listing
MoreLaw
Store
The Store
Recent Listings
(Search)
Add A Basic
Classified Ad
Links
County Seats
State Links
Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw

Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Date: 09-26-2013

Case Style: Michelle Postier v. Mikayla Rosser

Case Number: CJ-2013-2265

Judge: Mary Fitzgerald

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Stephen J. Modovsky

Defendant's Attorney:

Description: Michelle Postier sued Mikayla Rosser and David Rosser on negligence theories claiming:

1. That the Plaintiff, Michelle L. Postier, is a resident of Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma

2. That the Defendants are residents of the State of Oklahoma and the accident, incident and injuries out of which this suit arises occurred within the confines of Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

3. That this Honorable Court therefore has jurisdiction over the party litigants named herein and the subject matter hereof and venue is proper in Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

II. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

4. That paragraphs 1-3 are incorporated by reference.

5 That on or about May 10, 2011, Plaintiff was the dnver of an automobile thatwas
stopped m traffic eastbound on West Washington Avenue m Tulsa County

6 That at that time, Defendant Mikayla Rosser was travelmg directly behmd her and
negligently struck Plamtiff from behind

7. That the collision resulted in substantial damage to the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

8. That the force exerted on the Plaintiff from this collision due to Defendant’s negligence caused Plaintiff to suffer extensive injuries to her person and property, including but not limited to:

a. That she was taken by ambulance to a hospital with facial trauma;

b. That she sustained a fractured nose requiring surgical intervention to reduce in addition to broken and loosened teeth for which she required dental repair;

c. That she suffered cervicalgia subsequent the motor vehicle accident which were muscle, ligament, and joint in origin; and

d. That her hearing aids were lost and destroyed in the accident with only one broken hearing aid being found following the incident.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENCE

9. That paragraphs 1-8 are incorporated herein by reference.

10. That Defendant owed a duty to the Plaintiff, and all other drivers on the road, to operate the vehicle under her control in a safe and reasonable manner, using ordinary care to prevent injury to other persons and to keep a lookout consistent with the safety of other vehicles.

11. That the injuries suffered by the Plaintiff, were proximately caused by the Defendants’ negligence and reckless disregard in the following respects and particulars, however not limited as such, to-wit:

a. In the failing to keep such an outlook as a person of ordinary care would have kept;

b. In the failing to make timely or proper application of the brakes on the Defendant’s vehicle as a person using ordinary care would have made;

c. In the reckless driving at a rate of speed greater than a person using ordinary care would have driven under the same or similar circumstances;

d. In the failure to turn the vehicle to the left or right to avoid the collision; and

e. In the negligent entrustment of said vehicle from David Rosser to Mikayla Rosser.

12. That there are certain elements of damages, provided by law, that the Plaintiff is entitled to have considered that will fairly and reasonably compensate her for the injuries and damages incurred.

13. That Plaintiff is also entitled to a determination of elements of damages which she will sustain in the future.

14. That those elements of damages to be considered, separately and individually, from the date of the occurrence in question until the time of trial of this cause and beyond the time of trial, for the purposes of determining the sum of money that will fairly and reasonably compensate Plaintiff are as follows:

a. Physical pain that Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer from the date of the occurrence up to and beyond the time of trial;

b. Mental anguish that Plaintiff, has suffered and will continue to suffer from the date of the occurrence up to and beyond the time of trial;

c. Damages resulting from the physical impairment suffered by Plaintiff which she will continue to suffer from the date of occurrence up to and beyond the time of trial;

d. The amount of necessary and reasonable medical expenses incurred in the treatment of Plaintiff from the date of occurrence in question and which will in all reasonable probability continue to incur beyond the time of the trial;

e. The amount of lost wages resulting from Defendant’s negligence and/or reckless disregard; and

f. The amount of actual damages to Plaintiff’s automobile.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the Defendants for property damage, medical expenses, lost wages, mental and physical pain and suffering and any and all other compensatory damages and other actual damages in excess of Seventy Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($75,000.00); punitive damages in excess Seventy Five Thousand and 00/1 00 Dollars ($75,000.00); a sum of monies for attorney fees and costs of this action; pre-judgment interest as allowed by law; and any and all other relief this Court deems just and proper.

Defendant did not appear or answer.

Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



 
Home | Add Attorney | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Sign In
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City | Articles | Recent Lawyer Listings
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2012 MoreLaw.com, Inc.