Tort Law

Brien Roche Law > Tort Law Resources > Tort Case Law > Tort Law Cases – P > Permanency Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Attorney

Permanency Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Attorney

Fairfax Injury Lawyer Brien Roche Summarizes Permanency Cases

Brien Roche

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Permanency.  For more information on personal injury cases see the pages on Wikipedia. 

Permanency-Cases

1977 Chavez v. Continental Ins. Co., 218 Va. 76, 235 S.E.2d 335. 

Plaintiff injured in auto accident. She was insured under group accident policy providing benefits for permanent total disability. Permanent total disability was construed to mean disability that prevents plaintiff from continuing present employment, and, secondly, prevents her from pursuing any occupation for which she is reasonably fitted by reason of education, training, and experience. 

1973 Norfolk S. Ry. v. Rayburn, 213 Va. 812, 195 S.E.2d 860. 

Plaintiff’s doctor testified that sufficient length of time had passed for plaintiff to have had return of function if he was going to regain it. 

1971 Oak Knolls Realty v. Thomas, 212 Va. 396, 184 S.E.2d 809. 

Injuries are temporary if plaintiff will be cured. They are permanent if she will not be cured. If they are permanent and will have some disabling effect, then plaintiff may be entitled to recover. There was no medical testimony of permanency and injuries were not of such nature that jury could infer they were permanent no basis for permanency instruction. 

1964 Lee v. Artis, 205 Va. 343, 136 S.E.2d 868. 

No medical evidence of permanency, therefore no basis for instruction. 

1962 Phillips v. Fulghum, 203 Va. 543, 125 S.E.2d 835. 

Doctor said hernia permanent unless corrected by surgery, which he thought was risky and undesirable. Issue of permanency properly left to jury. 

1962 Allen v. Brooks, 203 Va. 357, 124 S.E.2d 18. 

Doctor testified that plaintiff would not be cured. This is sufficient for instruction on permanency. 

1961 MacDonald v. Firth, 202 Va. 900, 121 S.E.2d 369. 

Plaintiff’s doctor testified that plaintiff’s injury would be of prolonged duration. Word prolonged means of indefinite duration but it implies ultimate cure. Permanent implies no cure.

1954 Gwaltney v. Reed, 196 Va. 505, 84 S.E.2d 501. 

Evidence warranted giving of instruction on future pain and disability where evidence showed plaintiff still had pain and limitation of motion at time of trial. 

1951 Steele v. Crocker, 191 Va. 873, 62 S.E.2d 850. 

Defendant contended there was no evidence of permanent injuries and that instructions should relate to temporary injuries. However, it was shown that plaintiff was injured 21 months before trial, but was still under medical care, still required to wear specially constructed shoe and surgical corset, and it was uncertain whether she would ever dispense with such supports. Permanency issue properly submitted to jury. 

1950 Carver v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 191 Va. 265, 60 S.E.2d 865. 

Action on disability insurance contract. Evidence that plaintiff could not work as laborer sufficient to support finding that plaintiff totally and permanently disabled. 

1943 Walton v. Light, 181 Va. 609, 26 S.E.2d 29. 

Plaintiff need not allege permanency in order to claim such at trial.

 

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

Permanency Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Attorney

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

Contact Us For A Free Consultation