Acerca de

Lawsuits involving traumatic eye injury can bring substantial verdicts or settlements. Since 1984, I have helped victims of all kinds of serious injury, including traumatic eye injury. All personal injury cases are done on a contingency basis, meaning there is no charge until you win a verdict or settlement. If you or a loved one has suffered an eye injury, please contact me.

​

My wife, Ayala, is a certified instructor of the visually impaired. She received her master’s degree in education of the visually impaired from the Pennsylvania College of Optometry. She specializes in functional vision loss assessments.

She interviews and tests her clients in order to establish all the ways in which their vision loss affects their life. She can craft swimming goggles or other tools that simulate the vision loss.

​

With a simple pair of goggles, the semi-opaque plastic sheeting found on the inside of any breakfast cereal bag, some Saran wrap and scotch tape, we are able to simulate various levels of visual acuity.

​

This is amazingly effective in a settlement conference. Imagine the judge and the insurance claim adjuster putting on the goggles and seeing literally through your eyes. Then imagine the jury doing the same thing. It’s a sure fire tool to maximizing settlements and jury verdicts.

​

Eye Injury Case Study: Pedestrian Struck by an Automobile

Lawsuits involving traumatic eye injury can bring substantial verdicts or settlements. However, the eye injury must be properly proven to achieve maximum financial recovery. I recently represented a woman who suffered permanent damage to one of her eyes after she was struck by a car. Although she was struck at low speed, the force of the collision caused her to flop onto the street face first. She was left legally blind in that eye, retaining only “light perception,” that is, the ability to discern the source of light through that eye. Everything else is just a blur.

​

We filed suit against the driver since this driver saw my client long enough before hitting her to have avoided doing so. The case ultimately settled for $325,000. This was quite a feat, given that she began crossing a busy four-lane street when it was obviously unsafe. Crucial to the settlement was the way I was prepared to demonstrate to the jury how this woman’s life was drastically changed by the collision. I anticipated that the defense attorney would point out that most individuals are able to live normal lives even though they are legally blind in one eye. Some jet pilots fly with only one good eye. It was essential that I rebut any defense attempt to minimize the importance of loss of vision in one eye.

I used two novel techniques to put the parties in this woman’s shoes, to literally see through her eyes. I retained a certified educator of the visually impaired who suggested using goggles to simulate my client’s vision loss. With a simple pair of swimming goggles, the semi-opaque plastic sheeting found on the inside of any breakfast cereal box, some plastic wrap, and transparent tape, we were able to simulate various levels of visual acuity.

​

I was prepared to craft one set of goggles for each juror. Imagine the jurors putting them on and trying to maneuver through the courtroom. The goggles create a jarring effect on the wearer. The first reaction is dizziness. Once the wearer regains composure, she is confronted with the difficult tasks of moving through open doors, down steps, up ramps, etc. Simple activities of daily life become much more difficult when one loses depth perception and full field of vision. Try closing one eye. Notice how your depth perception immediately disappears. Your field of vision also shrinks. This is monocular vision. I brought the goggles to a settlement conference. I watched as the judge, the defense attorney, and the insurance claims adjuster tried them on. They struggled to hide their reaction, but I saw the effect. It was gratifying to watch their disoriented reaction and their immediate recognition of what would happen if jurors tried these goggles on in the courtroom. I also had an expert in vision loss create blurred photographs that simulated the client’s visual acuity and loss of peripheral vision. I found this expert at the Pennsylvania College of Optometry. Finally, I had this expert prepare a functional vision assessment. She met with the client at her home and assessed how her vision loss affected her daily activities. She then wrote up a detailed report.

​

The case settled shortly after the conference.
****

Lasik Cases

The number of LASIK malpractice cases has increased dramatically in recent years. These cases focus on surgical results that include, but are not limited to, corneal scarring, haze, over-corrections, astigmatism, and epithelial in-growth. For more about this topic, click here.