GoPro Cameras Helps Settle Motorcycle Accident Lawsuit for $1.25 Million
A motorcycle accident lawsuit was settled for $1.25 million after GoPro cameras helped provide substantial evidence.
The plaintiffs’ counsel faced a challenge because it was unclear whether the incident was the result of road rage.
Andrew Fallucca, the plaintiff, was riding his motorcycle down Debry Avenue in Orange, Connecticut. One of the defendants, Jerzy Narowski, a limo driver, allegedly unexpectedly shifted from the right to the left lane, striking the plaintiff. Hy’s Livery Service Inc., the limousine company that employed Narowski, was the second defendant.
The plaintiff suffered brain injuries, a skull fracture, a neck injury, a joint injury to his jaw, nerve damage, an injured foot, and other issues as a result of the accident, according to the complaint.
The defense’s counsel did not respond to a request for comment.
According to the plaintiff’s lawyer, Albert V. Carocci, a friend of the plaintiff was also riding a motorcycle with him. Both were wearing GoPro cameras that captured the incident. According to Carocci, there were also six eyewitness accounts of the incident. According to the plaintiff’s lawyer, Albert V. Carocci, a friend of the plaintiff was also riding a motorcycle with him. Both were wearing GoPro cameras that captured the incident. According to Carocci, there were also six eyewitness accounts of the incident. According to Carocci, the GoPro footage was critical to the case because some reports claimed the crash was caused by the limo driver’s road rage.
Carocci stated that if the accident was proven to be the result of road rage, insurance would not cover it.
“We had to walk a fine line,” Carocci said. “The way we handled it was by saying that it was reckless, but he never intended the consequences of swerving right into the motorcyclist.”
The defendant did not stop after hitting the plaintiff, according to the police report. He also claimed he was unaware of the collision.
The case was filed in 2020, but on June 15, 2023, Hudson Excess Insurance Co. filed a petition to intervene. They were claiming there was proof the accident was intentional and the defendant was not entitled to coverage.
The court denied the motion. Carocci stated that while this motion was filed during jury selection, if it is to be successful, it must be presented to the court earlier in the proceedings.
If the insurance company had prevailed on this motion, Carocci said, “We would have been trying the case against Jerzy Narowski, who doesn’t have any insurance. So this would have been very counterproductive because we were going after the limo company for the negligent conduct of their driver.”
The biggest challenge in the case was proving liability, Carocci said.
“[The defendant’s] claim was that the motorcyclist caused the accident,” Carocci explains. “The GoPros both motorcycle driver’s had on their heads showed… the plaintiff’s perspective, and then you see the swerving from his friend’s GoPro.”
“You can explain how an accident happens, but when you actually see an accident happening with video, it comes to life,” Carocci said.
Carocci noted that it’s often difficult to defend motorcycle drivers because there is a bias against them.
He goes on to say, “Some people in the general public… don’t appreciate or value motorcycles on the road.”
Free Accident Claim ReviewComplete the form to have an attorney review your accident claim
- Bicycle Accident Victim Injured in Car Accident Settles for $237,000
- $2.325 Million Settlement Reached for Woman in Car Accident
- Schoolteacher Settles for $1,500,000 After Car Accident Injuries
- $1.2 Million Reached in Car Accident Settlement
- Lawsuit Settled for $3.1 Million Involving Teenagers Killed in Collision with Officer