Morgan & Morgan's Keith Mitnik tells jurors a tow truck driver was driving dangerously fast on a residential road, just before striking a 7-year-old child, leaving her with a traumatic brain injury. Jurors found the driver, who worked for an asset recovery company, 45% responsible for the crash and handed down a $29.5 million verdict. Watch the trial.
Decatur, GA— Jurors last week handed down a $29.5 million verdict for the life-changing injuries a child suffered when she was struck by a tow truck while riding her bicycle. Dingess, et al. v. Hasan, et al., 23A02919.
The damage award, handed down Friday, wrapped the two-phase trial, and follows the DeKalb County (Georgia) State Court jury’s conclusion as to fault a day earlier. That decision found tow truck driver Zartavius Hasan and his employer, Associates Asset Recovery, 45 percent responsible for the 2023 collision that left the then-seven-year-old child with a traumatic brain injury.
Jurors apportioned 10 percent of responsibility to the child and 45 percent to the child’s mother, LaQuasia Dingess, likely reducing the post-verdict amount against defendants to $13.275 million.
In a statement to CVN issued after the verdict, Morgan & Morgan’s Evan Rosenberg, representing the plaintiff, said the award exceeded settlement offers the defense had rejected.
“Our repeated efforts to resolve the matter within the $1 million policy limits were unfortunately rejected," Rosenberg said in his statement. "The jury’s verdict now triggers additional financial obligations for the defense, including attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and pre-judgment interest—consequences that were entirely avoidable had any one of our numerous settlement offers been accepted."
Rosenberg told CVN he expects the total liability, after apportionment of fault and adding pre-judgment interest and attorney fees, to be roughly $23 million.
The collision occurred as the child was riding her bicycle in and around the driveway of a residential neighborhood as Hasan’s tow truck traveled down the roadway. And the two-day-long, first phase of trial focused on who bore responsibility for the crash, with reconstruction and video evidence playing key roles in the case.
In closings of the trial’s first phase last Wednesday, Morgan & Morgan’s Keith Mitnik, representing the plaintiff, reminded jurors of evidence he said showed Hasan was driving dangerously fast at the time of the collision, given that children were playing in the area. He added that, if Hasan had been driving slower, the collision would have been completely avoided.
“[If Hasan was driving] eight miles an hour instead of 20 miles an hour? That child is out in the road… and there’s nothing to talk about,” Mitnik said. There’s no slamming brakes, there’s no ‘Do you have time to stop?’ That’s it.”
But Cruser Mitchell’s Glenn Tornillo, representing the defense, noted that Hasan was driving within the posted speed limit at the time of the crash and that he was slowing down as he approached the area of the collision. He said evidence showed the child’s mother was negligent in failing to supervise the child, and that the child herself had ridden into the street suddenly from behind parked cars, leaving Hasan unable to stop or otherwise avoid the crash.
“The person who was responsible for [the child’s] safety on that day was her mother,” Tornillo said. “And her mother, unfortunately, was not doing her job that day.”
After the jury’s determination on liability, the trial moved into the damages phase, with questions over the child’s potential for recovery serving as a key battle line. In Friday’s closings, Tornillo said there was not enough evidence to support plaintiff’s contention that the child would likely need round-the-clock care throughout her life. By contrast, Tornillo pointed to a defense neurological expert’s conclusion that the child would make a significant recovery in the coming years.
“This is a serious injury. It’s not something you heal from in a year or two. It’s going to take time,” Tornillo said, in suggesting a $5.5 million damage award, including $2.3 million in medical expenses and another $3.2 million for pain and suffering. “But the medicine says she will get better.”
But in his closing on damages, Mitnik criticized the conclusions of the defense expert as inconsistent, and pointed to evidence that he said showed the child had not significantly improved since the collision and would suffer life-long catastrophic fallout from her injuries.
“Does it mean there’s no possibility [for significant recovery]? Of course not,” Mitnik said, in suggesting a roughly $86.9 million award, including $18.5 million in future medical expenses, and roughly $68 million for pain and suffering. “But we don’t roll the dice in the future on possibility [or] longshot. Decisions get made in court based on what’s more likely… true than not.”
In a statement to CVN after the verdict, Mitnik said he was satisfied with the jury’s award of damages, but criticized the trial’s bifurcation, a procedural change brought about by Georgia’s 2025 tort reform laws.
“For lawyers who watch trials to pick up new ideas, this is like a double-feature (two opening statements and two closing arguments in one trial),” Mitnik said. “The defense bar and insurance industry seem to think this helps them. As far as I can tell, all it does is eat up precious court time.
“After a hard-fought battle on liability, we rolled immediately into damages, which allowed us to focus exclusively on injuries suffered by this child, whose needs are significant. The purity of this phase led to a just verdict,” Mitnik added.
Rosenberg, in his statement, agreed. “While no verdict can undo the harm suffered,” Rosenberg said, “we are grateful that this outcome will provide meaningful resources to support our client’s future medical needs.”
CVN has reached out to attorneys for the defense and will update this article with any comments.
Email Arlin Crisco at acrisco@cvn.com.
Related information
Not a subscriber?
Learn how you can subscribe to an unrivaled trial video library.
