Vincent Micalizzi v. Stanford Superior Drug, Inc. and Barry Smith

Vincent Micalizzi v. Stanford Superior Drug, Inc. and Barry Smith

Case Name

Vincent Micalizzi v. Stanford Superior Drug, Inc. and Barry Smith

Type of Injury

BILATERAL CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME

Occupation

mover

Location

Bronx, NY

Verdict

$400,000 (6/0).

Verdict Amount

$400,000.00

Case Details

XI/2-6 MOTOR VEHICLE REAR END NO-FAULT QUESTION ON RADICULOPATHY AND BILATERAL CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME

Vincent Micalizzi v. Stanford Superior Drug, Inc. and Barry Smith 16145/91 2-week trial Verdict 6/16/93 Judge Gerald Crispino, Bronx Supreme

VERDICT: $400,000 (6/0). Breakdown: $25,000 for past pain and suffering; $10,000 for future pain and suffering; $115,000 for past lost earnings; $250,000 for future lost earnings. Post-trial motions were denied. Jury: 2 male, 4 female.

Pltf. Atty: Jeff S. Korek of Gersowitz, Libo & Korek, Manhattan

Deft. Atty: Paul Bibuld of Armienti, Brooks, Lubowitz, DeBellis & Dunphy, Manhattan

Facts: Pltf., a 47-year-old mover, claimed that on 1/29/91 his vehicle was struck in the rear by Deft.’s vehicle on the Bruckner Expwy. in the Bronx. Pltf. testified that he was traveling in the middle lane and that he slowed down as he passed a disabled car in the left lane. Deft. contended that Pltf. stopped short to avoid another vehicle in the left lane that had cut him off to avoid the disabled car. Pltf. denied that he was cut off by another car.

Injuries: cervical radiculopathy. Pltf. claimed that he developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome 3 months after the accident. He underwent surgery to both wrists. Pltf. also testified that he was unable to return to his previous employment and can only work at a sedentary job. He received Workers’ Compensation. Deft. denied that Pltf. sustained a serious cervical injury under the No-Fault Law, Insurance Law ? 5102(d), arguing that the carpal tunnel syndrome was related to Pltf.’s 25-year employment as a mover. Demonstrative evidence: diagram of median nerve; photographs of accident site; model of spine; economic chart. Offer: $150, 000; demand: $300,000; amount asked of jury: $900,000. Jury deliberation: 1? days. Carrier: Liberty Mutual. Pltf. Experts: Dr. Howard Finelli, orth. surg., Bronx; Dr. Jay Rosenbloom, examining neurosurgeon, Bronx (for Workers’ Compensation claim); Albert Levenson, economist, Woodmere; Edmond Provder, vocational rehabilitation, Manhattan. There was no expert testimony for Deft.

Disclaimer: The information on this website and blog is for general informational purposes only and is not professional advice. We make no guarantees of accuracy or completeness. We disclaim all liability for errors, omissions, or reliance on this content. Always consult a qualified professional for specific guidance.

RECENT POSTS

Family discussing long-term life care planning
June 1, 2026
Learn how long-term care planning helps families prepare for future personal care needs. Practical steps and expert guidance for creating a life care plan.
How Care Planning Improves Legal and Medical Outcomes
May 18, 2026
Learn how care plan management and life care planning improve medical treatment, legal documentation, recovery support, and long-term patient outcomes.
OAS personal injury evaluation covering brain, spinal, and trauma injuries assessment
May 4, 2026
Learn how Occupational Assessment Services evaluates injury types in personal injury cases. Understand brain, spinal, and emotional injury impacts clearly.
Understanding Gross Negligence with OAS Injury Assessments
April 20, 2026
In this guide, we’ll break down what gross negligence means, how it differs from standard negligence, and why it matters in a personal injury case evaluation.
Personal injury lawsuit process overview with OAS expert support
April 6, 2026
Learn the full personal injury lawsuit process and how OAS expert services strengthen cases, improve evidence, and help maximize compensation outcomes.

CONTACT US