“This result is a stunning example why a $500,000 cap is unconscionable and needs to be abolished,” said Jordan Strokovsky, the winning plaintiff’s counsel.
April 21, 2022 at 03:43 PM
3 minute read
A jury handed up a $2.67 million verdict Tuesday to a Philadelphia man injured in a car accident. But because the driver who struck him was an on-duty police officer, that award will likely be subject to the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act.
Philadelphia Police Officer Chad Culbreath was responding to a shootout when he drove through a red light and hit plaintiff Anthony Blume’s vehicle. As an employee of the city, his actions are subject to the limits put in place by the act.
The city of Philadelphia filed a motion to mold the verdict the same day the jury reached its decision. “At the time of the accident Chad Culbreath was acting in the course and scope of his duties as an officer with the Philadelphia Police Department,” the motion said, and so the award should be reduced.
“This result is a stunning example why a $500,000 cap is unconscionable and needs to be abolished,” said Jordan Strokovsky of Strokovsky LLC, attorney for plaintiff Blume. He said he and his client are currently weighing the options for how they will respond to the defendant’s motion to mold the verdict, which the city of Philadelphia filed the same day the jury reached its verdict.
“At the time of the accident Chad Culbreath was acting in the course and scope of his duties as an officer with the Philadelphia Police Department,” the defendant’s motion to mold the verdict said, and so the award should be reduced.
A representative for the Philadelphia Law Department declined to comment.
According to pretrial memos, the city had proposed a $100,000 settlement, and, according to Strokovsky, in the weeks preceding the trial the city increased its offer to $500,000. The plaintiff, however, opted to try the case before the jury.
The bulk of the verdict’s value, $2.2 million, was allocated for pain and suffering, while the jury valued the plaintiff’s past and future medical expenses at $460,000 and allotted $10,000 for disfigurement.
According to the plaintiff’s pretrial memo, Blume underwent several operations as a result of the injury, and is set to require more surgeries in the future. The pretrial memo says Blume suffers from continual pain and physical limitations as a result of his spinal injuries, which prevent him from leading the life he did prior to the accident.
The defendant’s pretrial memo, filed by Thomas Lipscomb of the Philadelphia Law Department, said that Blume had a prior history of lower-back issues and could not attribute all of his injuries to the accident.
The defendants did, however, stipulate to liability, Strokovsky said, so the question of fault was not addressed at trial.
“The jury could see what [Blume has] been through … and I think they understood that his issues were not going away,” said Strokovsky.
The case, filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, is captioned Blume v. City of Philadelphia.
