Jury Clears Driver in Florida Car Accident Injury Lawsuit
Table of Contents
Case Background
This legal saga began following a motor vehicle incident that occurred on August 17, 2019, in Orange County, Florida. In July 2020, Plaintiff Maria Ramirez initiated a lawsuit against Defendant Jonathon Bennett, claiming his negligent driving caused her serious and permanent physical harm. The case, filed in the Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, focused entirely on proving Bennett’s responsibility for the crash and the lasting impact it exerted on Ramirez’s life.
Cause
Maria Ramirez’s complaint firmly accused Jonathon Bennett of operating his vehicle carelessly and recklessly, asserting that his negligence became the direct legal cause of her injuries. She claimed Bennett had failed to maintain control of his vehicle, drove too fast for conditions, and generally neglected the duty of care owed to other drivers on the road. The claim specifically detailed that Bennett’s lack of proper attention suggesting he might have been driving distracted violated multiple state traffic laws, setting the foundation for the negligence claim.
Injury
Following the collision, the Plaintiff contended she suffered extensive and severe bodily injuries. Ramirez’s lawsuit alleged her injuries were not only painful and disabling but also permanent in nature. The damage extended beyond immediate physical trauma, encompassing claims for disfigurement, mental anguish, and a profound loss of the capacity for enjoying life. She claimed these permanent losses would require her to incur future expenses for medical treatment, nursing care, and rehabilitation, alongside a complete loss of her ability to earn money.
Damages Sought
Ramirez sought monetary compensation far exceeding the initial jurisdictional threshold of $30,000.00. Her demand for a judgment against Bennett covered a comprehensive range of damages: past and future medical expenses, loss of income, and non-economic losses, which included pain and suffering, disability, and loss of life enjoyment. The Plaintiff's demand for a jury trial underscored her confidence that a jury would award substantial damages reflecting the permanency of her condition.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The defense, led by Jonathon Bennett, vigorously opposed every claim, denying he had any responsibility for the accident or that Ramirez suffered any permanent injury from it. The legal arguments quickly established a sharp conflict over both liability (who caused the crash) and causation (whether the crash caused the claimed injuries).
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Maria Ramirez
· Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Ryan P. Rudd | Ady A. Goss | Daniel Hales
Experts for Plaintiff(s): Michael Freeman | Santo BiFulco | Robert Martinez | Mark Willits | David Kreisberg | Razack Nizam | Kevin M. Funez | Daniel Satterfield | Dung D. Nguyen | Brad Homan | Paul Potier | Catherine Hurley | Shelbie Manna | Andrew Messer | Ronald Stern | Sean M. Mahan | Haiden D. Berube | Pamela G. Freeman
Defendant(s): Jonathon Bennett
· Counsel for Defendant(s): Paul M. Thompson | Richard Lippert
· Experts for Defendant(s): Ming Xiao | Donald L. Mellman | Michael Zeide |
Michael J. Foley
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Ramirez's legal team maintained that the evidence likely including accident reports and medical records irrefutably proved Bennett's careless driving proximately caused the collision. They focused their efforts on convincing the jury that Ramirez’s injuries constituted a permanent impairment under Florida law, a necessary finding to unlock compensation for her significant pain and suffering and future economic losses.
Defense
In his defense filed in November 2020, Bennett flatly denied all allegations of negligence. Beyond simply denying responsibility, his counsel asserted several affirmative defenses that sought to either shift the blame or reduce any potential financial award.
Comparative Negligence: Bennett claimed that Ramirez herself, or a third party not involved in the lawsuit, bore some responsibility for the crash. This tactic aimed to convince the jury to apportion a percentage of fault to Ramirez, which would then reduce any damages awarded by that percentage.
Mitigation and Collateral Sources: The defense also argued that Ramirez had failed to properly mitigate her damages, suggesting she either did not seek necessary medical care or pursued unnecessary treatment. Furthermore, they demanded the right to offset any verdict by introducing evidence of collateral source benefits money Ramirez received from other sources like health insurance to prevent her from getting double payment for the same expenses.
Jury Verdict
After four years of intense litigation, the jury returned a decisive verdict on May 20, 2025, completely favoring the Defendant, Jonathon Bennett. The jury determined that no negligence was on the part of Jonathon Bennett was a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage to Maria Ramirez. This single finding became the final judgment for the case. The jury did not proceed to answer any questions regarding the Plaintiff’s negligence, the permanence of her injuries, or the amount of damages. The entire case concluded without any financial award to Maria Ramirez, securing a complete victory for the Defendant.