 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Reed v. County of Hillsborough12/2/2002
ommon experience as to obviate any need for an expert medical opinion." Weaver v. W.C.A.B. (Pa. Power Co.), 487 A.2d 116, 118 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1985).
The plaintiff alleges that she sustained severe and permanent injuries as a result of her fall, including head and nose injuries, knee injuries, medical expenses, and pain and suffering. In addition, while not expressed clearly in her writ, the plaintiff alleged in other pleadings that she also sustained abrasions to her head, neck, back and leg as a result of the fall. The cause and effect of such injuries as the latter may be so immediate, direct and natural to common experience that no expert testimony would be necessary. Based upon common experience, jurors may determine, without the aid of expert testimony, that her fall could cause such injuries. We therefore reverse the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's negligence case to the extent she claims damages relating to such obvious injuries and remand for further proceedings.
Given the ambiguity of her writ of summons, and the scant record before us, we cannot discern the precise nature and character of the remainder of the plaintiff's claimed injuries. As a result, the plaintiff is entitled to seek damages without expert testimony for those abrasions discussed above. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to seek damages for any other non-permanent injuries is left for determination by the trial court. We do not address any arguments regarding the plaintiff's alleged failure to comply with discovery deadlines since those issues were not raised before the trial court as a ground for dismissal. See Daboul v. Town of Hampton, 124 N.H. 307, 309 (1983).
Reversed in part and remanded.
BROCK, C.J., and BRODERICK, NADEAU and DUGGAN, JJ., concurred.
|