Arizona Court Upholds $7,500 Arbitration in Underinsured Motorist Claim
One driver was injured in a car accident. The other driver admitted fault. The injured driver sought compensation for her injuries, claiming her medical damages were higher than the insurance policy limit. Her own insurance company covered some medical costs but disputed others, citing pre-existing injuries. The dispute went to arbitration, which awarded the injured driver $7,500. She then filed a complaint to challenge the arbitration decision, but the court denied her request.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- $7,500
- County
- Maricopa County, AZ
- Resolved
- 2021
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Knee Injury
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Physical Injury, Economic Injury
Settlement Context
This verdict-defense of $7,500 is above the median of Undisclosed for knee injury cases resolved by verdict-defense. The typical range is Undisclosed to $3,725, based on 6 cases in our database.
Case Overview
In October 2008, a plaintiff sustained injuries in a car accident. The adverse driver admitted liability, and the plaintiff sought $15,000, the full coverage amount of the adverse driver's insurance policy, as compensation. Alleging insufficient compensation, the plaintiff filed an underinsured motorist claim with her own insurer, Progressive Preferred Insurance Company, for total medical damages of $25,524.59.
The defendant insurer agreed to cover emergency room treatment and a follow-up visit but disputed other medical expenses, including knee surgery, asserting they were not causally related to the accident due to the plaintiff's pre-existing injuries from a May 2007 slip and fall. Pursuant to an arbitration provision in the insurance contract, the parties submitted their dispute to arbitration in May 2013. The arbitrator awarded the plaintiff $7,500 in damages.
In September 2013, the plaintiff filed a complaint in the Arizona Superior Court for Maricopa County, seeking to vacate, amend, or set aside the arbitration decision. In December 2013, the court denied the plaintiff's requested relief, thereby upholding the arbitration award. The court subsequently denied the defendant insurer's request for an award of attorneys' fees and costs. The judgment was later affirmed on appeal.
Understanding This Case
- This case went to trial and resulted in a jury verdict. Verdicts can yield higher awards but carry the risk of receiving nothing if the jury rules against the plaintiff.
- This case was resolved in Maricopa County, Arizona. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2021, this case reflects the legal and economic conditions of that period, including medical costs, insurance practices, and jury award trends at the time.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome is within expected ranges
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Curious about your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Maricopa County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
A plaintiff alleged bilateral rotator cuff injuries resulted from paramedics' forceful removal of the plaintiff from a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, presumably alleging negligence in the plaintiff's care. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment in September 2006, concluding the case in favor of the defense.
The employer, Star*Tel Systems, appealed a decision by an administrative law judge in Kentucky. The judge had previously determined that an employee sustained a permanent and total disability following a work-related motor vehicle accident. The appeal challenged the judge's opinion, order, and award.
A collision occurred on September 20, 2012, on Kentucky Avenue near Floyd Street in Louisville. The plaintiff, then age 41, was making a right turn when the defendant pulled from a space to the plaintiff's right, resulting in the crash. The plaintiff sustained a rotator cuff injury that required surgical repair. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit, alleging the defendant negligently pulled from a parking lane into the plaintiff's path. The plaintiff sought $3,917 for past medical expenses, up to $15,000 for future medicals, and $120,000 for pain and suffering. The defendant denied liability, arguing she was in a turn lane, not a parking lane. An independent medical examiner for the defense also linked the plaintiff's shoulder issues to pre-existing degenerative conditions. Following a trial, a jury found in favor of the defendant on the issue of liability. A defense judgment was subsequently entered, and the plaintiff received no damages.
A personal injury case arose from an auto accident. The plaintiff retained an expert in economics to assess damages. The defendant presented experts in emergency medicine, biomechanics, and accident reconstruction, suggesting disputes over the nature or cause of injuries. An occupational therapy expert also participated in the case. The matter proceeded to a trial, which concluded on December 9, 2016. Details regarding the verdict or any award were not specified in the record.
A vehicle collision occurred in May 2008 on Stony Brook when a teenager, pulling from a private drive, struck a childcare worker's vehicle. The childcare worker sustained soft-tissue neck pain and was transported to the emergency room. Liability for the collision was later established by summary judgment. The injured worker subsequently filed a lawsuit in Louisville, seeking damages for medical bills, lost wages, impairment, and pain and suffering. The plaintiff's case was complicated by involvement in a second crash a month later, though injuries were distinguished. The defendant disputed the claimed injuries, citing credibility, lack of objective proof, and a "threshold" defense. The jury found the plaintiff met the medical expense threshold but did not sustain a permanent injury. Ultimately, the jury awarded the plaintiff $8,184 for medical expenses but $0 for lost wages, impairment, and pain and suffering, resulting in a total verdict of $8,184. A judgment consistent with this verdict was entered. The plaintiff later moved for a new trial, arguing the verdict was inadequate. The defendant countered, citing credibility issues. The motion was pending as of June 2016.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.