Rickard v. Vogel Holdings

Facts of the Case

The incident occurred on a typical one-way street in Pittsburgh.

• The Plaintiff: Nick, a 58-year-old “quintessential Pittsburgh guy” and beer delivery driver, was stopped behind a Vogel garbage truck.
• The Incident: The garbage truck suddenly backed up to take a shortcut down an alley, striking Nick’s 2001 Pontiac sedan.
• The Injury: Nick’s knee struck the dashboard upon impact, resulting in a torn meniscus.
• The “Tough Guy” Challenge: Nick continued his physically demanding job, lifting 180-pound beer barrels despite the pain, which the defense used to argue he wasn’t seriously injured.

Theories of Liability

Although the defense admitted fault four days before trial, the legal team had built a powerful liability case during discovery:

• Shortcut Dangers: The team established that the truck driver backed up solely to save two minutes by taking a shortcut, violating safety rules that prioritized moving forward.
• Safety Failures: Discovery revealed conflicting testimony between the truck driver and passenger regarding safety protocols.
• Broken Equipment: Attorneys uncovered that the truck was equipped with a rearview camera that the company had simply stopped repairing.

Strategic Decisions and Hurdles

The team utilized innovative trial strategies to bring Nick’s stoic nature to life for the jury:

• Psychodrama Preparation: Before trial, the attorneys used psychodrama to help Nick visualize the scene and connect with his suppressed emotions regarding his physical limitations.
• First-Person Storytelling: Justin Joseph delivered part of the opening statement in the first person as Nick, setting a vulnerable and authentic tone that helped the jury see the crash through the plaintiff’s eyes.
• Handling “Old Age” Defenses: To counter the defense’s claim that Nick’s pain was merely age-related degeneration, the team highlighted that he had zero preexisting medical records for knee pain despite decades of heavy labor.
• Power Reading vs. Connection: The attorneys discussed the “power reading” technique for openings—balancing the security of a script with the necessity of maintaining a genuine connection with the jurors.

The Closing Argument

The closing focused on the “human aspect” of the loss rather than cold analytics:

• The “Hero” Narrative: Eric Chaffin painted Nick as a hero who “grinds through the pain,” using his daughter’s testimony about him “giggling like a little girl” at Kennywood to show what had been lost.
• Accepting Responsibility: The defense was called out for admitting liability on paper while attacking the plaintiff’s pride in the courtroom.
• The Man with the Black Bag: The argument concluded with the “man at the door with the black bag” analogy, emphasizing that Nick would have never chosen the money over the health he lost.

The Verdict

The jury’s decision sent a clear message that they rejected the defense’s minimal valuation of Nick’s injury.

• The Award: $130,000 total ($30,000 for past pain and suffering; $100,000 for future pain and suffering).
• Comparison: The final verdict was 13 times the top settlement offer of $10,000.