312-372-1227 
Speaker 1 (00:05):
From the Chicagoland law firm of Salvi, Shostok and Pritchard, this is beating Goliath, a plaintiff’s pursuit of justice. Case number three, part three, Tierney Darden versus the city of Chicago. In our last episode, Tierney Darden’s attorneys presented her case to a Cook County jury after both sides completed their closing arguments. The case was now in the hands of the jury who would decide how much Tierney should be compensated for her injury. During closing arguments, Tierney’s attorneys suggested a verdict of around 175 million. While the defense attorneys for the City of Chicago suggested just about 30 million a number, not much different than their original settlement offer. It was clear both sides believed in their case, but it was only a matter of time before the jury would return their verdict and Tierney would hopefully and finally see justice.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
They deliberate about five hours, which was good. There was a few questions in between. We wanted them to take their time and go through each element and discuss it fully.
Speaker 3 (01:19):
They were trying to settle the case, but it just wasn’t coming up to the right number and we just felt so good about it given how everything went and closings were so powerful
Speaker 4 (01:29):
After closing arguments, but before we heard from the jury was that there were negotiations as it related to what’s called a high, low, low agreement is one where both sides are looking to mitigate their risk. Those discussions were going on here in the Darden case, whether or not there should be a high low and ultimately no high low came together.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
We were offered a high low of, the high was 75 million and the low was something like 40, but we didn’t feel that it was likely to be less than 75 million, so we turned that down and decided to take the verdict. I just felt in my gut the odds were it was going to exceed 75. I remember getting the word that we have a verdict,
Speaker 3 (02:26):
The judge’s clerk will call the parties and let us know that there’s a verdict, so we jump up, get all our things together, call the family, make sure that they’re there. It was a pretty crowded courtroom.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
It’s always very, very exhilarating, but a nervous time as you await a verdict. It’s very dramatic, a lot at stake, and I remember the defense lawyer asking me one last time whether or not I would agree to the high low. We said, no, we’re going to, we’re just going to take the verdict.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Eventually we get to the courtroom, we sit down and the war person, the jury war person that the group elects to be their spokesperson or so to speak, tells the judge they have a verdict.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
Generally speaking, not always, always the case, but if most of the jurors look at you or certainly if they look at you kind of favorably versus coming in and not just avoiding eye contact, each and every one cut out, they’re not too anxious to sit in the courtroom and disappoint you. So as I recall, it’s not like they were giving thumbs up to us as they walked in, but I just generally had a favorable sense that if a jury senses that what you’re about to hear is going to be you’re going to like, they can’t help. They get a little bit, they’re not as poker faced as they were during the trial.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
The verdict form was handed to the judge and the judge went to read the verdict and she said, we the jury find in favor of tyranny Darden and against the city of Chicago in the amount of, and it started with 100 and I think I blacked out at that point.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
The judge reads, we the jury find for the plaintiff tyranny Darden and against the defendant city of Chicago, we assessed the damages in the sum of 148 million 190,997 itemized as follows, and she reads the breakdown, but I remember when she read, we assessed the damages in the sum of 140 and we were just like, oh my God, I didn’t hear the rest of it.
Speaker 5 (05:04):
I knew it was going to be a good verdict. I just did not expect that, so I think I inhaled very sharply and I don’t think I could even breathe for a while because it was just so stunning
Speaker 6 (05:23):
When the verdict was being read. I can’t even describe how great it felt because it felt great, but it was a shock. I wasn’t expecting that much.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
I had my son Patrick and my daughter-in-law, Aaron a, they were very important parts of the team and as were Jeff and Tara and having tyranny and her parents there, it was great. It was like being among I cherish every day of my life
Speaker 6 (06:02):
At court was when they were reading the verdict. He held my hand the whole time and then I believe he was crying and hugged me and he just felt like family. Everyone felt like family
Speaker 7 (06:15):
When the verdict was read, first thought was relief because now we knew that Terry’s needs wouldn’t
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Be covered.
Speaker 7 (06:26):
The main reason we brought the case forward in the first place was because there was no way I was going to be able to pay for Terry’s continued care.
Speaker 8 (06:34):
It did feel great and it also, it felt great for me to know that the jurors recognized to the best of their ability what Tierney had gone through and what she’ll continue to go through.
Speaker 3 (06:46):
There’s kind of a vindication that you feel at the end of all of the blood, sweat, tears that went into your preparation and everything that your client went through and just for them to just knowing that she felt seen and heard and understood by this group of 12 people who didn’t even know who she was 10 days ago,
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Every juror wanted to hug tyranny. They lined up to hug her before they left each one. If you recall my story of the problem, juror replaced by the alternate and it was this alternate who became the 12th juror who came up to me and said, I’m sorry Mr. Salvia, I tried. I tried to get you more.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
When you get a very favorable verdict, it’s a very emotional thing. You’ve been on trial several weeks, there’s a lot of anxiety. You’re very tired, and so when you get a very favorable result, it’s very exhilarating and emotional for the lawyers, for the plaintiff, but it’s tough for your opponent and you have to be professional. They expect you to celebrate to some extent, but not over the top in the courtroom and it’s more hugging and then shaking hands with your opponents because we’ve all been there where we did not get a favorable result. So you’re not, you want to be professional and recognize the good work that they did and good effort that they made.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
The next morning we had a press conference across the street from our old office at a hotel and I was shocked at how many different newspapers or news channels or how many different organizations were represented at the press conference. This was a really big deal and it felt very surreal. It was like we could finally breathe again and knowing that we made the right move and turning down 30 million, I can’t say that I was expecting that number. Do I think she deserved it? Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (09:12):
The verdict
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Was represented by far and away the highest compensatory award ever in the history of Illinois that continues to this date approaching six years later,
Speaker 4 (09:25):
But it’s not so much that we set the record, it’s that Tierney’s injury was so severe that it demanded we set the record.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
It was a very long two years for her and her parents just having to adjust to everything and sometimes the parents were really nervous about the risk, I guess rejecting the 30 million and it’s natural. It’s a natural response, but you just can’t lose sight of the fact that this needs to last for decades, a whole lifetime.
Speaker 4 (10:01):
While this verdict seems like an eye-popping number, it really doesn’t even do justice to what Tierney has to go through. If there were an ad in the paper that said, we will pay you $148 million and for the rest of your life you will be paralyzed from around the belly button down, you will have pain every waking moment, you will live hour to hour on what your next pain medication will be. Most movements will be painful and every relationship that you have in your life, every last one of them will be diminished in about as significant a way as you can imagine, and in terms of any emotional connection, it’ll always, always be interrupted by your physical condition and the constant pain that you feel and you’re going to have to do that from your mid twenties for 50 years, nobody would take that job and anybody that did would regret it immediately.
Speaker 7 (11:18):
Would you prefer your leg or would you prefer the money? I’m sure she would give back all that money if she could only walk. Again,
Speaker 4 (11:29):
The verdict only entitles you to a judgment. It doesn’t entitle you to any actual money yet because there can be post-trial and appeals, and so
Speaker 8 (11:38):
Unless you have some other agreement in place when a trial is done there, even admitted liability trials, there’s always the potential for an appeal. One of the biggest concerns about an appeal is your client has now waited how long?
Speaker 3 (11:55):
Appeals can take several years, two, three years depending on how high up it goes. The verdict came in August 23rd, 2015. We went through post-trial motion, so the defense had filed a motion to lower the verdict and because of X, Y, and Z rulings that they felt were not correct,
Speaker 8 (12:21):
They gave us a lot more for future medical expenses than we had asked for, and so that was also one of the reasons why we knew that there was a potential for appeal or at least deduction because in essence, the jury awarded an amount for future medical expenses. That was above and beyond even what we suggested.
Speaker 7 (12:43):
Obviously the defense viewed her continued needs or future needs, et cetera, as much lower than what our side looked at, but when you looked at some of the things that they had in their list of what she might need, to me it looked like a sort of a jury considering both sides and combined the two.
Speaker 8 (13:03):
Our concern was that the courts would say, this is too much and a jury cannot in this situation, which we knew was a bad situation under the laws here in Illinois, that is too much and the verdict wouldn’t stand for that amount and they would’ve reduced it, and then we’re setting a horrible precedence for all the cases that come after us because now they have a number out there that the courts now in Illinois could have found potentially that you could never get above even if it’s a clean case and everything goes in well. As I said, that doesn’t mean that there can’t be post-trial motions. Doesn’t mean that there is not a risk of appeal, so that’s why our firm and our clients readily agreed to participate in post-trial, post verdict settlement mediation because we wanted to remove that risk for the clients.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
We went to mediation in January, 2018 and it was an all day thing. We had one of the best mediators well-respected by both the plaintiffs and defense bars, and we were able to reach a settlement agreement at the end of the day,
Speaker 8 (14:14):
This was never going to bankrupt a company or put the city of Chicago. They had so much insurance. This was a quarter of the insurance or whatever they had at the time. I think they also wanted to put an end to the bad publicity that they had already received.
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Tyranny can finally pick her life back up and get the treatment that she needs
Speaker 2 (14:40):
Yet ultimately resolved very favorably for tyranny and provided her literally with all of the resources necessary for her to get the best medical care and has been best pain management care in the country, which she has taken full advantage of and has really improved her, I’m very happy to say has really improved her life. I would not have been possible, but for the unlimited resources that she has at her disposal.
Speaker 6 (15:17):
The verdict really did help me out with everything from medicine to supplies, which you don’t know how many supplies you can go through in a month, but it’s fast. It’s basically been, I guess kind of like the rock in surviving this. It’s really helped with going to rehab, be able to work out and just having that stability is something that not a lot of people have, and so I’m very thankful for it.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
We first
Speaker 7 (15:59):
Learned about Q L I through a company called Broadspire, but Q L I, their philosophy is opioids bad activity, good.
Speaker 5 (16:10):
The nurse who recommended Q L I, she could not stop saying enough about it and then when the representative came and spoke with us, it was like, oh, she’s going there.
Speaker 8 (16:20):
It was like this amazing place where they helped wean you off of your opioid medications and give you other tools and skill sets to use.
Speaker 5 (16:27):
I think she very depressed when she went out there. I think that she was very resigned going out there. None of us were in a good place when she went out there and we were hoping that it was going to be something that was going to be beneficial to her, which then in turn would be beneficial to us because then we would get our daughter back.
Speaker 6 (16:56):
I diminished down to this sad, slow sloth being, it was bad.
Speaker 5 (17:05):
She was at a point where she knew she needed to do something, but I also know she was very scared, very, very scared. To be in a completely different environment with nobody around
Speaker 6 (17:18):
Weaning off the opioids was probably the most difficult thing I did there, but being off opioids and I guess learning how different of a person I was because I thought I was acting normal
Speaker 7 (17:34):
During the wean off, it was calls in the middle of the night where she was just in absolute pain. It is time when after she was weaned off where there’s less of those calls, they said her weed off period was longer than most that they have because of the amounts and of opioids and her need for opioids. It was sort of rough or it was rough, not necessarily for me, but for her during that wean off period because she was, her body was missing that medication, but they were working on getting her into different activities, different mindsets that she could use to focus away from the need for opioids.
Speaker 6 (18:19):
They tried to get me to eat healthy and then I talked to a therapist, which I did before Q L I, but this was more geared on how to manage your pain and not focus on your pain. I would say Q l I changed my life.
Speaker 8 (18:42):
I think Tierney, despite everything that she went through, I think her entire life, she was just someone who had a bright shining light inside of her, and I truly believe that it was her innate nature and positivity that got her through her recovery.
Speaker 7 (18:59):
When she got off the opioids, her hand steadied up. She became more clear, she’s more alert, she’s doing new things. She’s got a trader at export.
Speaker 6 (19:09):
I used to do art and I stopped because my hand was shaking so much, but now I’m steady as a rock and I can paint again, so I’m trying to get back into that like artistic streak.
Speaker 7 (19:21):
She’s lot more clear on that. Handshake has gone, she’s able to return to her art. She’s thinking for herself. She’s taken over her own handling of her medications, so previously been me taking care of all her medications, making sure she was taking them on time, and now she’s got clear enough head where she can do that kind of thing herself.
Speaker 5 (19:44):
She’s in a better place, so I know she’s taken care of. I know she can take care of herself. I have my daughter back. She’s her funny, silly self again, which is what she was before the accident. She’s so much more self-sufficient. She’s cooking dinners, she’s driving herself places, driving us to places. We go to painting classes together now she goes and works out now, so it was life changing
Speaker 3 (20:14):
And it always makes me happy because she’s making art again and she’s seeing her little nephews and she’s picked up hobbies again, and these are just things that she just was not going to be able to do before. She underwent all of this treatment, which obviously was not available to her before and that was a matter of resources and access. So it’s certainly helped her improve her quality of life, and that’s really what this is all about.
Speaker 5 (20:49):
I think one of the proudest moments was when she got her driver’s license. It’s another accomplishment for her. Another thing you can do, whether you’re in a wheelchair or not,
Speaker 6 (20:58):
My life is much happier
Speaker 8 (21:01):
Mentally. She’s in a great place. I think emotionally, she’s in a great place for it not to her catastrophic injury, to not define her future and define her. It’s like the most you can hope for.
Speaker 5 (21:13):
You have to try to always see the best in the situation where some days it’s impossible to do. Wake up the next day and see if you can’t find some gratitude in what that day brought. We got so very lucky on so many levels. We went to the right hospital with the right doctors. We went to the right law firm and got the verdict that we needed. We were able to go to the right rehabilitation places.
Speaker 6 (21:46):
I want to pay it forward now and make sure that other people in my situation are able to be comfortable and have a nice easygoing life like I did and help them out with the type of rehab that I had because not a lot of people get that opportunity and not a lot of people, if they do get that opportunity, get to stay as long as I did. I want to be able to provide the stability that I had to other people in my kind of condition.
Speaker 5 (22:16):
Tyra can do anything she wants to do if she sets her mind to it, so she has literally very few restrictions on what she can or can’t do. The only restrictions she has are what she places on herself, so how can I not be optimistic because I don’t see anything but a bright future for her.
Speaker 7 (22:44):
Charity’s injury has helped with, it’s gotten those shelters out of O’Hare so it won’t happen to somebody else. It’s got people thinking, where else are there issues, so that’s a positive.
Speaker 4 (23:00):
A verdict like this is certainly a message to anyone to be specific that has the responsibility of maintaining premises, particularly public ways.
Speaker 2 (23:13):
I hope and pray that the city of Chicago, especially at the airport, are much more diligent with regards to the maintaining of their premises.
Speaker 3 (23:22):
This verdict was not only important for Tierney and her health and her journey to improving her condition, but it was also extremely important for the city to take responsibility and take note of their lack of care, their carelessness in maintaining
Speaker 5 (23:42):
Premises
Speaker 3 (23:42):
Where there’s millions of people who go through O’Hare, you bet that they’ve got a routine now for inspecting these shelters.
Speaker 6 (23:53):
I think now I’ve gotten to the point where I’m just like, you messed up and you had to deal with the consequences, and I hope you learned from your mistake.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Thank you for listening to Beating Goliath, a Plaintiff’s Pursuit of justice. Special thanks to Tyra Darden for allowing us to share her story. Beating Goliath was written and produced in-house at Salvie, Shasti and Pritchard Sound, designed by Eric Ciani and editing by the talented team at SY Media. To learn more about this case or to listen to more episodes of beating Goliath, head to selvy law.com/podcast. Until next time.
