Illinois Pedestrian Accident Settlements & Case Values
Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers is committed to protecting the legal rights of people hurt in pedestrian accidents in Chicago, Illinois. Our team of personal injury attorneys has successfully resolved different types of serious injury claims across Illinois and know what it takes to ensure the value of your case is maximized.
While the majority of our cases get resolved out-of-court in negotiations with insurance companies, we are also prepared to go the distance and take your case to trial if needed. We have review data on different types of settlements to give you a flavor of the value of your case.
Keep in mind that pedestrian injury case, like other personal injury cases are valued on a combination of damages known as economic and non-economic damages such as: medical bills, disability, pain and suffering, lost wages and punitive damages. Should you have questions about your situation, we welcome you to contact our law firm for a free consultation with a pedestrian accident attorney
Role of Insurance Companies in Settlements for Pedestrians Hit by Vehicles
Given the nature of these serious injuries, we have been successful in recovering significant settlements in these cases that often represent the full amount of available insurance coverage.
Please review these frequently asked questions below for information on specific information related to average settlement for pedestrians hit by cars.
- How Much are Pedestrian Accident Soft Tissue Injury Cases Worth?
- How Much are Pedestrian Accident Bone Fracture Cases Worth?
- How Much are Pedestrian Accident Back and Neck Injury Cases Worth?
- How Much are Pedestrian Accident Brain Injury Cases Worth?
- How Much are Pedestrian Accident Fatality Cases Worth?
Past Illinois Pedestrian Injury Settlements and Verdicts Involving Car AccidentsHow much is your pedestrian accident case worth? This is probably the single-most recurring concern you will have after an incident. To begin to answer this question, we compiled the following case summaries from similar accidents.
These should help give you a sense of what was possible before for other plaintiffs. They are grouped by injury type to help you further narrow your focus.
How Much are Pedestrian Accident Soft Tissue Injury Cases Worth?
Schmidtke v. Pullis, Madison County: $65,000
This accident occurred at a gas station in Jonesboro, Illinois. A man in his late twenties pulled up to the station, got out, and started to pump gas into his car. Then, he reached back into his vehicle to grab something. At this time, a car backed up and pinched him between both vehicles. The driver did not see the man because he was bent over reaching into his car.
The pedestrian suffered soft tissue damage around his ribs that eventually developed into costochondritis (also known as Tietze's syndrome). He sued the driver for negligence. The defendant's insurer responded that he was not at fault and that the plaintiff was responsible because he parked his car too close to his.
Additionally, the defendant claimed that the plaintiff was exaggerating the nature of his injuries. On the issue of who was at fault, the jury decided the defendant was, and on the issue of damages, the jury decided that the amount should be $65,000.
Orlove v. Romanowski, McHenry County: $37,000
A waitress in her mid-forties had just finished work and was excited to return home. She left the restaurant and entered the street, darting out into a crosswalk. At just that moment, a southbound car entered that same crosswalk and struck her. Obviously, only she was seriously injured, since she was a pedestrian. She suffered soft tissue injuries in her chest and shoulders.
To recover damages for these injuries, she sued the driver for negligence. He actually admitted fault but denied that she was injured as badly as she claimed. On that issue, the matter proceeded to trial, where the jury found that her case was worth $37,000:
- Pain and Suffering: $20,000
- Lost Wages: $12,000
- Punitive: $5,000
- Total: $37,000
This case involved another parking lot accident. An 18-year-old was standing in a parking area adjacent to a shopping center. A driver in the lot started to go in reverse hoping to exit the center. Instead, he ran the young boy over and gave him soft tissue injuries in his thighs and back as well as a knee injury that required surgery.
After the young man sued the driver, the defendant blamed him and replied that the plaintiff should have been more careful and alert. To that, the plaintiff stated that the defendant was driving recklessly through the parking lot during the day when there was no adverse weather. This last part might have tipped the scales for the jury because they awarded him $54,582.69; however, they also gave him 40% of the fault, so he only netted $32,749.61 in recovery.
How Much are Pedestrian Accident Cases Involving Bone Fracture Cases Worth?
Claims for broken bones from pedestrian incidents normally cover immediate and short-term damages such as emergency room bills and missed paychecks. However, if the accident had a long-term impact, the claim could be worth more. These summaries show you the recovery range that is possible with these causes of action.
HENDERSON VS. MATHEWS; COOK COUNTY; $101,000 JURY AWARD
In this case, a CTA driver hit a pedestrian as the 39-year-old man was waiting at an intersection. As a result, the man suffered a broken tibia. He decided to sue the driver and the driver's employer.
The injured pedestrian alleged that the driver was driving too fast, should have yielded to him, and should have otherwise kept a better lookout while driving; additionally, the lawsuit alleged that the employer was vicariously liable for the torts of the torts of its employee-driver because the latter was acting within the course of his employment.
The driver did not have any grounds to dispute the notion that he was negligent, but the insurance company still argued that the plaintiff was exaggerating the true extent of his injuries. The employer repeated these defenses and also claimed that the driver was not working at the time of the accident.
The jury only found that the driver was negligent-not the employer-and awarded the plaintiff $101,000 for pain and suffering.
HEINRICH VS. KATZ; COOK COUNTY; $478,663 JURY AWARD
A 61-year-old woman was walking through a crosswalk on a sunny afternoon when a car crashed right into her. The force of the crash broke her left tibia and this injury later developed arthritis.
Obviously, the woman filed suit against the driver for negligence by failing to reduce his speed, yield, and watch out for pedestrians. The defendant did not deny any of these allegations; rather, he contended that the majority of the plaintiff's injuries stemmed from an earlier, unrelated condition.
Therefore, the driver's insurance company believed the plaintiff's should have been significantly lower in scope compared to what she asked for at trial. The jury disagreed and found him entirely liable for the whole breadth and scope of her harms, totaling $478,663 for the following damages categories:
- Medical Treatment: $68,663
- Pain and Suffering: $250,000
- Punitive Damages: $160,000
- Total: $478,663
DOUGLAS VS. CITY OF CHICAGO; COOK COUNTY; $782,000 JURY AWARD
A 62-year-old man was making his way through the streets of downtown Chicago, trying to find the subway station, when he was hit by a cop van as he tried to cross the street.
The van was attempting to make a left-hand turn when it collided with the gentleman, dislocating and breaking his foot. Doctors who cared for the man recommended surgery but at the time of the eventual trial he had not opted it for that procedure yet, even though it still caused him a great deal of pain and discomfort.
At trial, he claimed that even though the crosswalk signal was not functioning at the time of the accident, he still had the right of way and that the cop should have slowed down and yielded to him. He also sued the City of Chicago in its capacity as the driver's employer and under vicarious liability theories of negligence.
The defendants responded that the light was actually working during the crash and that the cop had the right of way. Therefore, their contention was that the plaintiff was actually the negligent party. On this question of fact, the jury came down on the side of the plaintiff and awarded him $782,000 for his injuries and gave 100% of the culpability to the defendants thereby avoiding any watering down of the verdict.
How Much are Pedestrian Accident Back and Neck Injury Cases Worth?
CARLSON VS. ENNIS; WINNEBAGO COUNTY; $364,890 SETTLEMENT
In this unfortunate and preventable incident, the defendant-driver started out the night by drinking a lot at a local golf club. He then get in his car and proceeded to drive home. However, before he could get far, he struck Ashley Simpson in a crosswalk.
The crash left her with extraordinary brain, neck, and back injuries. She sued him for driving while drunk, driving at a reckless speed, and failing to yield to her, amongst other allegations. She also sued the golf club for serving the driver beyond an intoxicated state under dram shop laws.
Both defendants denied all allegations. Specifically, the driver argued that the plaintiff crossed the street outside of the crosswalk and that she ran right out in front of his car. However, before the jury decide who was right, all parties agreed to settle: the driver and the plaintiff settled for $300,000; the golf club and the plaintiff settled for $64,890.
IBATA VS. STOHR; COOK COUNTY; $20,000 JURY AWARD
The in this case was struck in a crosswalk by a car as he tried to cross a busy intersection in Arlington Heights. As a result of the crash, he sustained significant fractures and other injuries in his neck. He sued the other driver for negligence.
The lawsuit alleged that the driver ignored traffic signals, was driving too fast, and did not yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk. The defendant quickly countered that it was the plaintiff's obligation to yield to him and that the plaintiff was not entitled to cross the street at the time anyways.
The jury found each of them equally responsible for the accident; thus, the plaintiff's $20,000 jury award was cut in half. Also, the jurors awarded the plaintiff damages only for medical bills-not for pain and suffering or loss of normal life.
WADE VS. ROWAN; COOK COUNTY; $212,000 JURY AWARD
A pedestrian, Barrington Wade, was standing by his car when another vehicle came flying by and sideswiped him before he could enter. The traumatic incident left Wade with serious neck and back injuries as well as lacerations on the arms and legs.
He sued the driver, Kevin Rowan, who was driving the car involved in the accident. In the suit, he claimed that Rowan failed to reduce his speed and yield to pedestrians. He sought damages for medical expenses, property damages, disfigurement, disability, and pain and suffering. Rowan replied that Wade was exaggerating the extent of his injuries and made the affirmative defense that the Wade should have yielded to him instead.
On this controversy, the jury found for the plaintiff and awarded him $212,000 but also apportioned him 40% of the responsibility for the crash and this lowered his amount by that much-nearly $85,000!
How Much are Pedestrian Accident Brain Injury Cases Worth?
FRASER VS. BJORK; COOK COUNTY; $495,850 JURY AWARD
Celeste Fraser went to take her dog out on a cold winter night, but, unfortunately, she got more than she bargained for. As she tried to cross the street within the crosswalk a car turned right and crashed into her. The force of the collision threw her to the ground and gave her a torn ACL and several cerebral contusions.
She sued the driver for negligence and argued that he should have yielded to her and kept a better lookout. From the incident, she claimed damages of over $20,000 in medical bills as well as significant short-term memory loss.
The defendant was not slow in responding, he said he was driving at a careful speed and that it was too dark to see the plaintiff. Both parties tried to resolve this dispute out of court, but the plaintiff's last demand of $500,000 (the amount of defendant's insurance policy) was too far from the defendant's last offer, $150,000. The jury awarded her $495,850.
O'NEILL VS. NARVAEZ; MADISON COUNTY; $731,063 JURY AWARD
In this strange case, an 88-year-old woman was leaving a department store when she was suddenly hit by a truck. What is interesting is that the truck was driven by a toddler. Apparently, the mother of the child left him inside for just a few months, but this was more than enough time for him to jump out of his car seat and put the car into motion.
Eventually, it rammed into the plaintiff and pinned her between the truck and another vehicle. The accident left the elderly woman with a long list of injuries including a mild brain injury, broken bones in the arms and pelvis, and significant blood loss.
She sued the parent for negligent care of her child and the mother responded that she did the best she could. The jury awarded her $731,063, well beyond the plaintiff's final demand of $230,000. Here is how the jury broke down the award by damages categories:
- Medical Bills: $171,063
- Pain and Suffering: $300,000
- Punitive Damages: $260,000
- Total: $731,063
PHILLIPART VS. GALMAN; SANGAMON COUNTY; $731,063 JURY AWARD
An 18-year-old foreign exchange student was hit by a 16-year-old driver as the former tried to cross a busy highway. The woman sustained serious brain injuries that eventually complicated into a coma. Representatives for the woman claimed the driver was negligent and should have slowed down prior to the incident.
They demanded $2,000,000 but the defendants only offered $100,000 so the matter proceeded to trial. At trial, the defendant tried to argue that another car was illegally parked and that that blocked his vision. The jury did not sympathize with him because they awarded the woman $1,000,000 in damages.
However, they also allocated her 45% of the responsibility, therefore she only netted $550,000 far below her final $2,000,000 demand.
POTHABATHULA VS. RENDERED SERVICES INC.; COOK COUNTY; $3,300,000 JURY AWARD
This case started when a 38-year-old man tried to cross the street but was hit by a truck driver and sustained a skull fracture that developed into a traumatic brain injury. The injury also eventually caused the man to experience significant depression.
He brought a personal injury claim against the driver and the driver's employer claiming that the former was driving too fast and should have either yielded to or the warned him as he approached. The defendants could not fight any of these allegations but countered that the plaintiff was exaggerating his injuries and that he could have mitigated his damages by taking proper medication. The jury awarded him $3,300,000 for the following damages:
- Medical Costs: $800,000
- Lost Wages: $1,000,000
- Pain and Suffering: $1,000,000
- Punitive Damages: $500,000
- Total: $3,300,000
BROWDER VS. PACE; COOK COUNTY; $2,461,474 JURY AWARD
This case involved a bus accident in a crosswalk. The 47-year-old plaintiff tried to cross within the area but was hit by the bus driver. She sued the driver and the company for negligence arguing that the latter should have trained the employee better and the former should have kept better control of the vehicle.
The defendants really had no room to argue because the plaintiff was clearly in the crosswalk and had the right-of-way. The jury returned a $2,461,474 award for the plaintiff for these damages:
- Medical Costs: $811,474
- Pain and Suffering: $750,000
- Punitive Damages: $900,000
- Total: $2,461,474
How Much are Pedestrian Accident Fatality Cases Worth?
The ultimate toll fatalities place on families after tragic pedestrian accidents is reflected in their case value. The summaries below illustrate the extraordinary recovery victims have obtained following these events and how insurers tend to evaluate these cases.
Arlene Marshall was an energetic 68-year-old woman out for a bike ride in St. Charles, Illinois. A truck came up behind her and attempted to execute a right-hand turn but in doing so entered the bike lane and hit Marshall. She died as a result of the incident.
The estate of Marshall filed a lawsuit against the driver and the driver's employer. Both defendants countered that Marshall was contributorily negligent by leaving the bike lane and ignoring traffic signals. Rather than risk significant losses at trial, they decided to settle with the plaintiff for $875,000.
NEACE VS. MILLER; COOK COUNTY; $3,500,000 JURY AWARD
The decedent in this case was a United States Air Force veteran, wife, and mother. She tried to cross a four-lane highway at night but was run over by the defendant's car. The force of the vehicle ripped her spine right in half; she died almost immediately.
The real controversy in this case was if the victim was crossing the street on an official crosswalk. Illinois law defines a crosswalk as between lateral lines that connect two sidewalks on both sides of the road. The jury decided that she was walking within a crosswalk and that the driver was negligent in the operation of his vehicle.
They awarded her estate $3,500,000 but, in an apparent compromise, cut this in half by also giving her 50% of the responsibility for the incident. Thus, she actually only recovered half of that award.
NEACE VS. MILLER; COOK COUNTY; $750,000 JURY AWARD
Luiz Cruz was a 14-year-old out for a ride on his bike when a vehicle going approximately 50 miles per hour clipped him from behind. The boy fell off his bicycle and died upon impact.
The driver sped away and had to be corralled by the cops. It was later determined that he was drinking and driving just prior to the crash. The next of kin sued the driver for loss of society.
Considering that local authorities were simultaneously bringing criminal charges against the man, he did not stand a chance in civil court. He settled with the decedent's mother for $650,000 and with the decedent's brother for $100,000.
VALADEZ VS. DAVIS; COOK COUNTY; $3,100,000 JURY AWARD
Leticia Valadez was walking through a crosswalk on the south side of Chicago when a private bus rammed into her and dragged her for a few blocks. Injuries related to this accident later killed Valadez.
The estate of Valadez sued the driver and the company the driver was working for at the time of the crash for negligence. The plaintiffs brought their action under the Wrongful Death Act of Illinois for loss of consortium and various survival damages. The jury found that both defendants were liable to the plaintiff for $3,100,000 in the following categories:
- Pain and Suffering: $1,000,000
- Loss of Society: $1,500,000
- Loss of Services: $600,000
- Total: $3,100,000
This incident involved a disabled and blind man who tried to go over a railroad crossing but was hit by an approaching train. Unfortunately, he did not survive his injuries and died later that day.
Representatives for the decedent's estate filed suit against the train company under the Wrongful Death Act and Survival Act for the pain that he had to endure prior to his death and for the loss of consortium and services following his death.
At trial, the plaintiffs alleged that the company should have alerted customers that its train would be riding on the opposite side of the tracks than it normally did and that it failed to protect customers from oncoming traffic.
The defendants replied that the plaintiff should have yielded to the train, that he ignored train lights and signals, and that he went around protective barriers. The jury found that the defendants were 95% at fault and the plaintiff was 5% at fault; therefore, their $5,000,000 award to the decedent's estate was lowered to $4,750,000.
Learn the Full Value Of Your Pedestrian Accident Settlement With the Help of Our Personal Injury LawyersAll of these numbers and legal doctrines are important, but they are just considerations. Your case is different from every other case before it. Call Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC today to hear about how these laws and others affect your chances at recovery for your pedestrian accident case.
Our law firm works exclusively on personal injury cases for accident victims and never handles any commercial disputes or work for insurance companies. Consequently, when you retain our office you can rest assured that we have your best interests in mind as we guide you through your case.