Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]

Bartolone v. Jeckovich | 103 A.D.2d 632 (1984)

A mentally ill man was holding his own, living a somewhat isolated but independent life. Then he got in a car wreck and subsequently fell to pieces. The court in Bartolone versus Jeckovich considered whether a defendant could be held liable for a plaintiff’s total and permanent disability after what was admittedly just a minor fender-bender.

Angelo Bartolone loved to work out, spending four hours a day bodybuilding at the local YMCA. He spent weekends engaged in art and music. These hobbies were his way of coping with his fear of doctors and illness, a result of both his mother and sister having died of cancer when he was young. At the age of 48, he identified as a loner, but he was self-supporting and content. He lived alone in a single room and worked as a carpenter.

Then Bartolone got into a car accident with Lynn Jeckovich, for which Jeckovich was held liable. Bartolone suffered whiplash and lower back strain, and was treated with muscle relaxants and physical therapy. His injuries weren’t serious, but they did render him unable to maintain his bodybuilding regime. He perceived that his bodily integrity was impaired and thought he was deteriorating physically. Without the emotional coping mechanism afforded by his workouts, Bartolone deteriorated psychologically and socially, and eventually suffered a psychotic break. He became hostile and delusional and thought he heard voices. He isolated himself, stopped participating in his former activities, and refused to bathe, shave, or cut his hair.

Bartolone sued Jeckovich. Bartolone’s doctors testified that he’d suffered from paranoid schizophrenia before the accident, but the accident had aggravated the condition to the point that he was totally and permanently disabled. The trial jury returned a verdict awarding Bartolone $500,000 in damages. Jeckovich argued that, although Bartolone had suffered from schizophrenia before the accident, the car wreck hadn’t made it worse, and Bartolone was just trying to make money. The trial court agreed that there was no basis on which the jury could’ve concluded that Bartolone’s total breakdown has been caused by a minor accident. It set aside the verdict and ordered a new trial unless Bartolone would agree to accept $30,000 instead. Bartolone appealed.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]

The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

свернуть