Oneil Walters v. Jermel L. Coates and MMI Mechanical Inc.

Oneil Walters v. Jermel L. Coates and MMI Mechanical Inc.

Case Name

Oneil Walters v. Jermel L. Coates and MMI Mechanical Inc.

Type of Injury

MENISCUS TEAR AND DERANGEMENT OF SPINE’S LUMBAR REGION

Occupation

Mechanic

Location

Bronx, New York

Verdict

During defense counsel’s presentation of his case, the parties negotiated a settlement. The defendants’ insurer agreed to pay $925,000, from a policy that provided $1 million of coverage.

Verdict Amount

$925,000

Case Details

On Jan. 11, 2013, plaintiff O’Neil Walters, 30, a mechanic, was driving on the northbound side of Grand Concourse, near its intersection at East 149th Street, in the Mott Haven section of the Bronx. While he was proceeding through the intersection, his car collided with an eastbound truck that was being driven by Jermel Coates. Walters claimed that he suffered injuries of his back and a knee.

Walters sued Coates and Coates’ employer, MMI Mechanical Inc. Walters alleged that Coates was negligent in the operation of his vehicle. Walters further alleged that MMI Mechanical was liable because the accident occurred during Coates’ performance of his job’s duties.

Walters claimed that the collision occurred while he was stopped in traffic. He claimed that the truck struck the left side of his car. He further claimed that Coates was executing a left turn onto the northbound side of Grand Concourse. Left turns were not permitted at the intersection. Plaintiff’s counsel noted that Coates was en route to a truck-rental agency located nearby on Grand Concourse. Coates acknowledged that he was traveling to the rental agency, but he claimed that he was not executing a left turn. He claimed that he intended to proceed straight through the intersection.

Coates also claimed that Walters’ car struck the right side of the truck. He suggested that a southbound bus had blocked Walters’ view of the truck. In response, plaintiff’s counsel contended that the location of the vehicular damage supported Walters’ version of the manner in which the accident occurred. Plaintiff’s counsel also claimed that Coates’ testimony contradicted testimony provided by a police officer who responded to the accident.

Disclaimer: The information on this website and blog is for general informational purposes only and is not professional advice. We make no guarantees of accuracy or completeness. We disclaim all liability for errors, omissions, or reliance on this content. Always consult a qualified professional for specific guidance.

RECENT POSTS

Importance of a Vocational Expert in TDIU Cases
June 2, 2025
Learn how oasinc vocational experts play a crucial role in TDIU cases and how their testimony can strengthen disability claims for veterans seeking benefits
When and Why to Call a Vocational Expert for Evaluations - Oasinc
May 19, 2025
Exploring what vocational evaluations are, how a vocational expert helps, and when is the right time to call oasinc vocation expert for evaluations. Learn More!
The Role of Vocational Experts in SSD Hearings - Oasinc
May 5, 2025
Learn how the role of a vocational experts enhances your SSD hearing and impact disability benefits. Learn how Oasinc Vocational Assessment Helpful in SSD Cases
What is the Role of the Vocational Expert? - OAS
April 21, 2025
What is the Role of the Vocational Expert? Explore what a Vocational Expert does, why they matter, and how Oasinc Vocational Expert services can help.
Why Are Vocational Experts Necessary in Personal Injury Cases?
April 7, 2025
Vocational Experts in Personal Injury Cases as they assess how an injury affects a person's ability to work and determine the impact on earning capacity.

CONTACT US