Martinez.clip book.final

A partner in WORLDCOM Public Relations Group 215.545.4715 www.simonpr.com

Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. $55 Million Honda Verdict

Media Results

June and July 2014

Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C. Jury Issues $55 Million Verdict Against Honda

Media Results June and July 2014

To secure visibility for the firm’s record-setting auto defect verdict, Simon PR conducted a national PR Newswire distribution and secured interviews for firm partner Stewart Eisenberg with regional and trade media outlets. Key placements included:

Associated Press Featuring a quote from Mr. Eisenberg, this story was picked up nationally by ABC News, MSN Money, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and other news outlets across the country. Key Philadelphia placements included The Bucks County Courier Times, CBS News, The Reporter, and The Press of Atlantic City. The Philadelphia Inquirer Read by more than 300,000 people, this daily newspaper highlighted how a defectively-designed seatbelt caused the plaintiff to strike his head on the vehicle’s roof during a rollover. As a result of the accident, the plaintiff became paralyzed. Regional Television Coverage National coverage included placements on Al Jazeera American and on radio stations in Texas, Oregon, and Illinois. Agency also secured placements on the region’s leading TV stations, 6-ABC and NBC-10. Trade Media Coverage A front-page story in The Legal Intelligencer highlighted how this verdict was the largest reported one since PALaw Magazine began tracking data in 1994. The Agency also secured additional placements in Law 360 and PA Law Weekly, as well as the American Association for Justice’s News Brief which is distributed daily to trial lawyers across the country.

June 27, 2014

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A jury ordered Honda Motor Co. to pay $55.3 million for a rollover accident that left a Pennsylvania man paralyzed, but the car company said Friday it would appeal.

Lawyers for Carlos Martinez, 57, of York, argued during a nine-day trial that a faulty seat belt design in his Acura Integra caused the permanent injuries he suffered in 2010.

Martinez was driving to work in suburban Baltimore when a tire blew out and he lost control of the car, said his attorney, Stewart Eisenberg. The seat belt failed to prevent Martinez's head from hitting the roof of the car as it rolled over, the lawyer said.

Acura is a division of Honda. A spokesman for the company denied any problems with the "proven restraint system used by virtually every manufacturer."

"The evidence here clearly established that there is no vehicle-based defect that caused Mr. Martinez's injuries," Honda spokesman Chris Martin said in an emailed statement.

Eisenberg contended Honda knew such an injury was possible based on seat belt testing it conducted in 1992.

Damages awarded by the Philadelphia jury on Thursday include money for pain and suffering, future medical expenses, loss of consortium and loss of earnings. Martinez, a married father of four, worked in construction as a glazier but is now paralyzed from the chest down.

"All of a sudden their life is destroyed by this accident," said Eisenberg.

Martinez's nephew, a passenger in the car, was wearing his seatbelt but was not injured, Eisenberg said.

###

June 28, 2014

By David Sell, Inquirer Staff Writer

Posted: June 29, 2014

A Philadelphia jury said Honda should pay $55.3 million to a York, Pa., resident who was badly injured in 2010 when his Acura Integra rolled over during a crash while he was en route to workin Maryland.

American Honda Motor Co. said it would appeal Thursday's decision.

A native of the Dominican Republic, Carlos Martinez, 57, was working as a glazier for a construction company at the time of the accident, but now must use a wheelchair, according to his attorney, Stewart Eisenberg. Martinez can lift his arms slightly but cannot use his hands, Eisenberg said. Martinez and his wife have four children.

Martinez's nephew was in the passenger seat, but was not injured.

Eisenberg told jurors that the seat belt was poorly designed and that Martinez hit his head on the roof during the rollover.

"We have evidence that the jury believed; they had evidence that the jury didn't believe," Eisenberg said. "That is what a jury trial is about."

Honda spokesman Chris Martin said via e-mail, "Honda is saddened whenever someone is injured in one of our vehicles. However, the evidence here clearly established that there is no vehicle-based defect that caused Mr. Martinez's injuries. Plaintiff's claim that a design defect existed in his seat belt is wholly without merit. The three-point seat-belt design used by Honda in this vehicle is a proven restraint system used by virtually every manufacturer."

###

Jury Awards $55.3 Million for Defective Seatbelt in a Honda Vehicle Broadcast Coverage Report

6/30/2014

1. AL JAZEERA AMERICA TELEVISION

JUN 28 2014 6:00AM CT Nielsen Audience: N/A News [**06:10:56 AM**] 20 MILLION VEHICLES HAVE BEEN RECALLED. HONDA ORDERED TO PAY $55 MILLION FOR A CRASH THAT LEFT A DRIVER PARALYZED. CARLOS MARTINEZ SUFFERED PERMANENT INJURIES IN 2010 CAUSED BY A DEFECTIVE SEAT BELT. THE FATHER WAS DRIVING TO WORK WHEN IT BLEW OUT. HONDA SAID IT WILL APPEAL.

2. AL JAZEERA AMERICA TELEVISION

JUN 28 2014 7:00AM CT Nielsen Audience: N/A News & Real Money with Ali Velshi [**07:22:11 AM**] HONDA ORDERED TO PAY 55 MILLION FOR A CRASH THAT LEFT A DRIVER PARALYZED. CARLOS MARTINEZ SUFFERED INJURIES CAUSED BY A DETECTIVE SATURDAY BELT. THE FATHER WAS DRIVING TO WORK WHEN IT BLEW OUT AND HE LOST CONTROL OF HIS CAR. HONDA SAID IT WILL APPEAL.

3. WCAU-NBC TELEVISION PHILADELPHIA, PA

JUN 27 2014 11:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 182,929NBC10 News at 11PM

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $5,000 [**11:07:16 PM**] WELL, IT'S BELIEVED TO BE A RECORD VERDICT IN AN AUTO DEFECT CASE IN PENNSYLVANIA. A JURY IF PHILADELPHIA TODAY ORDERED HONDA MOTOR COMPANY TO PAY $55.3 MILLION AFTER A ROLLOVER ACCIDENT. 57-YEAR-OLD CARLOS MARTINEZ OF YORK WAS PARALYZED WHEN A TIRE BLEW AND HE LOST CONTROL OF HIS ACURA INTEGRA. THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO KEEP HIS HEAD FROM HITTING THE ROOF AS THE CAR FLIPPED OVER AND HONDA KNEW ABOUT THE DEFECT. HONDA SAYS IT WILL APPEAL.

4. WPHL-MNT TELEVISION PHILADELPHIA, PA

JUN 27 2014 10:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 85,083Action News At 10

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $875 [**10:01:58 PM**JURORS FOUND WHEN HIS ACURA INTEGRITY ROLLED OVER HIS SEAT BELT DID NOT PREVENT HIM FROM STRIKING HIS HEAD ON THE ROOF. IT WAS DEFECTIVE. YEARS FROM THE CRASH HONDA WAS AWARE OF SEATBELT ISSUES WITH ACURA INTEGRITY RA AND FAILED TO PROVIDE A SAFER DESIGN ALTERNATIVE.

5. WPVI-ABC TELEVISION PHILADELPHIA, PA

JUN 27 2014 11:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 292,034Action News

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $4,500 [**11:16:26 PM**] A 55 MILLION VERDICT AGAINST HONDA. IN 2010 CARLOS MARTINEZ WAS IN ROLLOVER ACCIDENT THAT LEFT HIM PARALYZED. A FAULTY SEAT BELT DESIGN IN HIS ACURA INTEGRITY RA CAUSED HIS INJURIES. HONDA DENIES ANY DEFECT IN THE RESTRAINT SYSTEM AND SAID IT WILL APPEAL.

6. WGAL-NBC TELEVISION HARRISBURG-LANCASTER-LEBANON-YORK, PA

JUN 27 2014 11:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 49,983News 8 at 11PM

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $825 [**11:02:46 PM**] NO ONE WAS HURT, BUT IT TOOK SEVERAL CREWS TO PUT IT OUT. SO FAR NO WORD ON A CAUSE. 3 A PHILADELPHIA JURY HAS ORDERED HONDA TO PAY A YORK FATHER OF 4, 55-MILLION DOLLARS. CARLOS MARTINEZ SUED, CLAIMING A FAULTY SEAT BELT DESIGN IN HIS ACURA INTEGRA LEFT HIM PARALYZED AFTER AN ACCIDENT IN 2010. BUT HONDA SAYS THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM, AND IT WILL APPEAL. MARTINEZ WAS DRIVING TO WORK WHEN A TIRE BLEW OUT AND HIS CAR FLIPPED. HE SAYS THE SEATBELT FAILED TO KEEP HIS HEAD FROM HITTING THE ROOF OF THE CAR AS IT ROLLED.

7. WHP-CBS TELEVISION HARRISBURG-LANCASTER-LEBANON-YORK, PA

JUN 27 2014 11:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 18,399CBS21 News at 11PM

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $190 [**11:07:06 PM**] NEW TONIGHT, A PHILADELPHIA JURY HAS RETURNED A 55 MILLION DOLLAR VERDICT AGAINST HONDA MOTOR CORPORATION FOR A ROLLOVER ACCIDENT THAT LEFT A YORK COUNTY DRIVER PARALYZED. LAWYERS FOR CARLOS MARTINEZ ARGUED A FAULTY SEAT BELT DESIGN IN HIS ACURA INTEGRA CAUSED THE INJURIES HE SUFFERED IN 2010. HIS LAWYERS SAY THE FATHER OF FOUR WAS DRIVING TO WORK WHEN A TIRE BLEW OUT AND HE LOST CONTROL OF THE CAR. THEY CLAIM THE SEAT BELT FAILED TO PREVENT HIS HEAD FROM HITTING THE ROOF OF THE CAR AS IT ROLLED OVER. HONDA SAYS IT WILL APPEAL THE VERDICT, AND DENIES ANY DEFECT IN THE RESTRAINT SYSTEM.

8. WHTM-ABC TELEVISION HARRISBURG-LANCASTER-LEBANON-YORK, PA

JUN 27 2014 11:00PM ET Nielsen Audience: 43,372ABC27 News at 11PM

30-Second Ad Equivalency: $400 [**11:05:23 PM**] NEW TONIGHT, THE JURY SIDED WITHA YORK MAN IN A MASSIVE LAWSUIT AGAINST HONDA. CARLOS MARTINEZ WAS AWARDED 55-POINT-THREE-MILLION DOLLARS. IN 2010, HE WAS IN A CRASH. [**11:06:35 PM**] IN 2010, HE WAS IN A CRASH. HIS LAWYERS SAID THE FAULTY SEATBELT DESIGN HIS 1999 ARA INTEGRA, CAUSED HIM TO HIT HIS HEAD ON THE ROOF AND TURNED HIM INTO A QUADRIPLEGIC. THEY ALSO ARGUED HONDA KNEW ABOUT THE SEAT-BELT ISSUE. HONDA DENIES THERE'S ANY DEFECT AND WILL APPEAL. 55-MILLION DOLLARS IS THE MOST A JURY HAS EVER AWARDED IN A CIVIL SUIT IN PENNSYLVANIA.

9. KLIF-AM Radio DALLAS-FT. WORTH, TX

JUN 27 2014 5:00PM CT Nielsen Audience: 1.500Kurt Gilchrist [**05:01:54 PM**] A JURY IN PHILADELPHIA HAS ISSUED A FIFTY FIVE MILLION DOLLAR VERDICT AGAINST HONDA FOR ROLLOVER CRASH THAT LEFT DRIVER PARALYZED. LAWYERS FOR CARLOS MARTINEZ ARGUED THAT ALL THESE ALL DESIGNED IN HIS ACURA INTEGRA CAUSED HIS INJURIES IN TWENTY TAN. THE AUTOMAKER DENIES ANY DEFECT AND PLANS TO APPEAL.

10.KPAM-AM Radio PORTLAND, OR

JUN 27 2014 8:00PM PT Arbitron Audience: 200 Evening News Updates [**08:02:05 PM**] A PHILADELPHIA JURY IS ORDERED HONDA TO PAY MORE THAN FIFTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS FOR ROLL OVER ACCIDENT THAT LEFT THE MAN PARALYZED. LAWYERS ARGUED THAT A FAULTY SEAT BELT DESIGNED IN THE ACURA INTEGRA. CAUSED THE PERMANENT INJURY HE SUFFERED IN TWO THOUSAND AND TEN. HONDA PLANS TO APPEAL THIS IS NBC NEWS RADIO. 11.WGN-AM-RADIO Radio CHICAGO, IL

JUN 28 2014 MULTIPLE AIRINGS Arbitron Audience: 49,000 (cum)WGN Radio 720 - The Voice of Chicago [**04:31:33 AM**] PHILADELPHIA JURY HAS RETURNED FIFTY FIVE MILLION DOLLAR VERDICT AGAINST HONDA FOR A ROLL OVER ACCIDENT THAT LEFT DRIVER PARALYZED. LAWYERS FOR CARLOS MARTINEZ ARGUED A FAULTY SEAT BELT IN HIS ACURA INTEGRA CAUSED THE INJURIES HE SUFFERED IN 2010. HONDA SAYS IT WILL APPEAL THE VERDICT.

Zack Needles, The Legal Intelligencer

June 30, 2014

A Philadelphia jury awarded $55.3 million to a man who was paralyzed when his head struck the roof of his 1999 Acura Integra as it rolled after a tire blew out.

An examination of PaLaw magazine, an annual review of the legal profession in Pennsylvania, indicates this is the largest reported verdict in a Pennsylvania crashworthiness case since the magazine began tracking data in 1994.

According to the verdict sheet, the jury found that plaintiff Carlos Martinez's injury was caused by the Integra's defective seat-belt design and that defendant American Honda Motor Co. was negligent for failing both to redesign the seat belt and to warn consumers that they were at risk for hitting their heads on the roof if the vehicle rolled.

The verdict in Martinez v. American Honda Motor came down in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Shelley Robins New's courtroom June 26 after a nine-day trial and an hour-and-a-

half of deliberation, according to the plaintiffs' attorney, Stewart J. Eisenberg of Eisenberg Rothweiler Winkler Eisenberg & Jeck in Philadelphia.

According to the verdict sheet, the jury awarded $25 million to Martinez for past and future noneconomic damages, $15 million to his wife, plaintiff Rosa De Los Santos De Martinez, for loss of consortium, about $14.6 million for future medical expenses and about $720,000 for past and future lost earnings.

According to the plaintiffs' pretrial memorandum, Carlos Martinez was rendered quadriplegic when the tire on his Acura struck a nail, blew a tire and rolled while he was driving in Maryland in May 2010.

While Honda blamed Martinez's own negligence in its own pretrial memorandum, saying his injuries "were caused by the extreme forces involved in the vehicle veering off the highway, impacting a ditch and then rolling over multiple times," the plaintiffs' memorandum said Martinez was traveling at less than 33 miles per hour when his car started to roll over.

The plaintiffs' accident reconstruction expert, Micky Gilbert, said Martinez was driving below the 55 mph posted speed limit when he ran over a nail he could not have seen and reacted "in an expected manner by trying to turn the vehicle back to the left," according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

Following an assessment of the 1999 Integra's design and multiple vehicle inspections, the plaintiffs' automotive design expert, Larry Sicher, found that "the restraint system and overall design of the subject vehicle was defective and unreasonably dangerous, and provided no protection to Mr. Martinez, even though the crash was low-speed," according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' biomechanical engineering expert, Brian Benda, reached a similar conclusion, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

"The only reason Mr. Martinez sustained catastrophic and paralyzing injuries was because the defective design of the subject vehicle failed to keep him, a seat-belted occupant, from loading his neck during the rollover event, resulting in serious damage to his spine," the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

Eisenberg, who tried the case with Eisenberg Rothweiler associate Daniel J. Sherry Jr., said he argued at trial that the seat belt should have been attached to the seat, rather than one of the "pillars" separating the vehicle's windows.

Honda, meanwhile, argued in its memorandum that there was "no alternative seat-belt design that would have prevented or reduced" Martinez's injuries.

Eisenberg said he also argued at trial that Honda had performed rollover tests for the 1999 Integra in which the crash-test dummy repeatedly hit its head on the roof, but never corrected the problem before bringing the vehicle to market.

According to the jury sheet, the jury found that the Integra's driver's side seat-belt was "defective in its design and that there was an alternative, safer practicable design."

The jury also found that the Integra was defective because of Honda's failure to warn and that those defects were "solely attributable to the impact that occurred when the roof of the car hit the ground," according to the jury sheet.

Eisenberg said that, during deliberation, the jury asked the court to see a copy of the owner's manual.

The jury also inquired as to whether there were any guidelines or precedence for awarding noneconomic damages and whether Honda would be able to appeal the award, according to Eisenberg.

"We were gratified that the jury found Honda should have redesigned their seat belt system when they knew there was a risk of head or spinal cord injury during a rollover," Eisenberg said. "The clients are very grateful that [Martinez] will now have the ability to get care for the rest of his life."

The plaintiffs' medical expert, Dr. Guy Fried, said Martinez's injuries were "'serious and permanent'" but that he is expected to have a normal or nearly normal lifespan, according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

According to the plaintiffs' memorandum, Martinez has had multiple urinary tract infections and gastroesophageal reflux disease since the accident.

Martinez also continues to suffer from chronic weakness, numbness, pain, spasticity, neurogenic bowel and neurogenic bladder as a result of his paralysis, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

The plaintiffs' life care plan expert, Lorraine E. Buchanan, estimated Martinez's future life care costs, without factoring in inflation, at about $10.8 million, according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' economic expert, David Hopkins, then adjusted that figure to about $14.6 million after inflation was accounted for.

Hopkins also estimated Martinez's future lost earnings at between about $460,000 and $990,000 depending on whether Martinez retired at age 62 or age 70, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

Counsel for Honda, Christopher G. Mavros of Campbell Campbell Edwards & Conroy in Berwyn, Pa., could not be reached for comment at press time.

Zack Needles can be contacted at 215-557-2493 or [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @ZNeedlesTLI.

Philly Jury Slaps Honda With $55M Seatbelt-Flaw Judgment Law360, Los Angeles (June 27, 2014, 10:00 PM ET) -- A Philadelphia jury on Thursday issued a $55 million verdict against Honda Motor Co. for a seatbelt defect the company allegedly ignored that a driver claimed paralyzed him, in the highest auto defect verdict ever issued in the state, the plaintiff’s attorneys said. The jury ruled in favor of plaintiff Carlos Martinez, who became a quadriplegic after his 1999 Acura Integra rolled over in an accident, his attorneys, led by Stewart J. Eisenberg of Eisenberg Rothweiler Winkler Eisenberg & Jeck PC, said in a statement Friday. Martinez’ seatbelt didn’t keep his head from smacking the top of the car as the car rolled over, causing his paralysis, according to the suit. Honda knew about the defect as early as 1992, but did nothing to fix it and didn’t disclose it to drivers, the attorneys said. “I am gratified that my client was heard and the jury's verdict against Honda and in favor of consumer safety will allow him to have the means to receive the care will need for the rest of his life,” Eisenberg told Law360. A spokesperson for Honda could not be reached late Friday for comment. The verdict includes $25 million for noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering, $14.6 million for future medical expenses, $15 million for his wife’s loss of consortium and $720,000 for lost future earnings, the attorneys said. "Honda's failure to alert the public to this hazard caused Mr. Martinez to suffer debilitating and painful injuries. This incident could and should have been avoided by a safer design that already existed,” Eisenberg said in a statement. “Through this verdict, we are hoping to prevent such unnecessary and devastating injuries from happening to others.”

It’s not the first time Honda has faced litigation over the effectiveness of its seatbelts. In February, Honda defeated accusations that it was liable for the death of a man who was driving a Honda sedan when he was involved in a fatal accident in 2004, when a Louisiana jury rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that the vehicle had a defective seatbelt. Following a weeklong trial, the jury in state court in Bossier Parish determined that the seatbelt system in the 1995 Honda Accord driven by Paul Day Allred Jr. was not unreasonably dangerous in design, clearing Honda of liability in Allred's death. The jury returned the verdict after deliberating for 15 minutes, according to Bowman and Brooke LLP, which represented Honda at trial. Allred was fatally injured on the right side of his brain, which the plaintiffs argued only happened because the seatbelt didn’t properly restrain him from striking his head on the side sun visor, according to the suit. But the jury in that suit instead found that the driver of the car that hit Allred’s was fully at fault. Martinez was represented by Stewart J. Eisenberg and Daniel J. Sherry Jr. of Eisenbert Rothweiler Winkler Eisenberg & Jeck PC. Counsel information for Honda could not be determined. The case is Carlos Martinez et al. v. American Honda Motors Co., case number 111203763, in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia, Pa.

http://www.law360.com/

July 8, 2014

Date of Verdict: June 26.

Court and Case No.: C.P. Philadelphia No. 111203763.

Judge: Shelley Robins New.

Type of Action: Products liability.

Injuries: Paralysis.

Plaintiffs Counsel: Stewart J. Eisenberg and Daniel J. Sherry Jr., Eisenberg Rothweiler Winkler Eisenberg & Jeck, Philadelphia.

Defense Counsel: Christopher G. Mavros of Campbell Campbell Edwards & Conroy, Berwyn, Pa.

Plaintiffs Experts: Micky Gilbert, accident reconstruction, Wheat Ridge, Colo.; Larry Sicher, automotive design expert, Penns Park, Pa.; Brian Benda, biomechanical engineering, Penns Park, Pa.; Dr. Guy W. Fried, spinal cord, Chicago, Ill.; Lorraine E. Buchanan, life care, Blue Bell, Pa.; David Hopkins, economics, King of Prussia, Pa.

Comment: A Philadelphia jury awarded $55.3 million to a man who was paralyzed when his head struck the roof of his 1999 Acura Integra as it rolled after a tire blew out.

According to the verdict sheet, the jury found that plaintiff Carlos Martinez's injury was caused by the Integra's defective seat-belt design and that defendant American Honda Motor Co. was negligent for failing both to redesign the seat belt and to warn consumers that they were at risk of hitting their heads on the roof if the vehicle rolled.

According to the plaintiffs' pretrial memorandum, Martinez was rendered quadriplegic when the tire on his Acura struck a nail, blew a tire and rolled while he was driving in Maryland in May 2010.

While Honda blamed Martinez's own negligence in its own pretrial memorandum, saying his injuries "were caused by the extreme forces involved in the vehicle veering off the highway, impacting a ditch and then rolling over multiple times," the plaintiffs' memorandum said Martinez was traveling at less than 33 miles per hour when his car started to roll over.

The plaintiffs' accident reconstruction expert, Micky Gilbert, said Martinez was driving below the 55 mph posted speed limit when he ran over a nail he could not have seen and reacted "in an expected manner by trying to turn the vehicle back to the left," according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

Following an assessment of the 1999 Integra's design and multiple vehicle inspections, the plaintiffs' automotive design expert, Larry Sicher, found that "the restraint system and overall design of the subject vehicle was defective and unreasonably dangerous, and provided no protection to Mr. Martinez, even though the crash was low-speed," according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' biomechanical engineering expert, Brian Benda, reached a similar conclusion, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

"The only reason Mr. Martinez sustained catastrophic and paralyzing injuries was because the defective design of the subject vehicle failed to keep him, a seat-belted occupant, from loading his neck during the rollover event, resulting in serious damage to his spine," the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

Plaintiffs attorney Stewart J. Eisenberg said he argued at trial that the seat belt should have been attached to the seat, rather than one of the "pillars" separating the vehicle's windows. Eisenberg said he also argued at trial that Honda had performed rollover tests for the 1999 Integra in which the crash-test dummy repeatedly hit its head on the roof, but never corrected the problem before bringing the vehicle to market.

Honda argued in its memorandum that there was "no alternative seat-belt design that would have prevented or reduced" Martinez's injuries.

According to the plaintiffs' memorandum, Martinez has had multiple urinary tract infections and gastroesophageal reflux disease since the accident.

Martinez also continues to suffer from chronic weakness, numbness, pain, spasticity, neurogenic bowel and neurogenic bladder as a result of his paralysis, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

The plaintiffs' medical expert, Dr. Guy Fried, said Martinez's injuries were "'serious and permanent'" but that he is expected to have a normal or nearly normal lifespan, according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' life care plan expert, Lorraine E. Buchanan, estimated Martinez's future life care costs, without factoring in inflation, at about $10.8 million, according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' economic expert, David Hopkins, then adjusted that figure to about $14.6 million after inflation was accounted for.

Hopkins also estimated Martinez's future lost earnings at between about $460,000 and $990,000 depending on whether Martinez retired at age 62 or age 70, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

After a nine-day trial and an hour-and-a-half of deliberation, the jury awarded $25 million to Martinez for past and future noneconomic damages, $15 million to his wife, plaintiff Rosa De Los Santos De Martinez, for loss of consortium, about $14.6 million for future medical expenses and about $720,000 for past and future lost earnings.

According to the jury sheet, the jury found that the Integra's driver's-side seat belt was "defective in its design and that there was an alternative, safer practicable design."

The jury also found that the Integra was defective because of Honda's failure to warn and that those defects were "solely attributable to the impact that occurred when the roof of the car hit the ground," according to the jury sheet.

— Zack Needles, of the Law Weekly