Later in the medical documentation, a description of riding a motorcycle and "jumping on a bump in the road" appeared in the documentation dated July 10, 2018; Jumping and "violent landing on the moshav" in footage dated October 21, 2018; jumping on a seat while riding a motorcycle in documentation dated November 15, 2018; and "1/2 year ago Ted on a motorcycle" in the documentation dated November 19, 2018. The later documentation, which was all given before the plaintiff filed her claim in the previous proceeding, is consistent with the plaintiff's version.
All of this teaches us that in some cases it is difficult to rely on medical documentation as a complete, exhaustive, and reliable description of the events. In the plaintiff's case, there are various factual descriptions, some of which are missing and some of which include incorrect details, but the overall picture leads to the conclusion that the plaintiff complained of back pain following the motorcycle ride on the cattle crossing when she sought medical treatment after the incident, and this version is also supported by the testimonies brought on her behalf. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion that although there is a difficulty in the medical documentation, its content supports the plaintiff's version more than detracts from it.
The court's expert opinions and testimonies regarding the mechanism of sabotage and the causal connection
- Another relevant element when examining the incident of the cattle crossing is the opinion of the court's experts in the field of orthopedics and neurology, and their testimonies regarding the mechanism of the injury, for the purpose of determining the causal connection between the incident and the disability and damage caused to the plaintiff.
- At the beginning of the hearing, it should be stated that a review of the plaintiff's medical file shows that with the exception of one complaint from 2011 about low back pain, as well as a report of a fall and a dry blow to the tailbone in 2016, the plaintiff's complaints in the orthopedic field were only related to neck and upper limb pain. Accordingly, even the imaging tests performed on the plaintiff's spine in the years prior to the incident were performed only on the cervical spine, and no findings were recorded in the lumbar spine or lower back.
On the other hand, the imaging tests performed on the plaintiff after the incident revealed clear findings indicating injury to the lower back and lumbar spine, as demonstrated in a CT scan of June 13, 2018, in which a general disc protrusion was diagnosed that causes pressure on the sac in the L4-L5 vertebrae, as well as a precentral hernia in the L5 S1 vertebrae on the left, which causes moderate-severe pressure on the sac and the S1 root on the left, and moderate foraminal narrowing on the left.