Motor Vehicle Collision

Our client was driving on a road in Sunriver when an oncoming driver attempted a left turn and crossed over into her lane. She tried to pull to the right shoulder and brake, but the vehicles collided head-on.

Law enforcement responded and concluded the other driver was at fault. The motor vehicle crash was forceful enough to deploy the airbag, and our client felt the impact through her braced right leg and into her upper body.

Even with a head-on crash and a police fault finding, the defense still raised comparative negligence, arguing our client should have avoided the collision and suggesting speed and lookout issues.

The other major issue was the right knee. Our client had a prior knee injury earlier in the year, and the insurer questioned how much of the ongoing knee pain and degeneration was from the crash versus what was already there. The case needed proof that the collision significantly worsened the knee condition and changed the course of treatment going forward.

• The defense raised comparative fault arguments despite the head-on mechanics and police fault determination.
• The insurer challenged the connection between the crash and the ongoing knee problems because of a preexisting knee condition.
• Our client's injuries were real, but the insurer's early offer did not reflect the long tail of treatment, especially for the knee.

We first presented the claim to the insurer with supporting records and a demand. The response was a low offer that did not match the medical expenses or the likely future treatment needs, so the case moved into litigation.

Through discovery and depositions, the case developed around two points: why the crash happened, and why the knee symptoms that followed were not simply “already there.” The matter then proceeded to mediation, where it ultimately resolved without a trial.

The case settled for $250,000 — the full amount available under the at-fault driver's auto liability policy.

The settlement resolved our client's injury claims from the crash, including past medical expenses and the ongoing knee issues that were the center of the dispute. It also allowed the case to conclude without the risk and delay of a trial.

For our client, the result meant she could pay down the medical burden from the crash and make decisions about ongoing knee care with a little more breathing room. It also brought closure after a long stretch of treatment, uncertainty, and a fight over whether the crash truly changed her health and day-to-day life.