Personal Injury Attorney Advice on Pre-Existing Conditions

Most people carry some medical history into a crash or fall, whether it is a bad back from years of lifting, a repaired meniscus from high school sports, or migraines that flare under stress. Insurance companies know this, and they often try to turn your history against you. They argue your pain is old news, your limitations were already there, and your current medical bills belong in your past. That is only half the story. The law recognizes aggravation and acceleration of pre-existing conditions as real, compensable harm, if you can prove it. That proof comes from careful documentation, candid conversations with your doctors, and a strategy that meets skepticism head-on.

I have sat across the table from adjusters who flip through medical records and circle phrases like “degenerative changes” or “chronic.” I have also stood in front of juries who understand that a person who was doing just fine on Sunday but could not lift a coffee mug on Monday has experienced a change that deserves compensation. The difference between those two moments is preparation. Below are practical insights on how to protect your claim when you have a medical history, and how a car accident attorney or personal injury attorney will build a case that reflects the real you, not the caricature an insurer prefers.

What “pre-existing” really means in injury claims

Pre-existing does not mean you were doomed to hurt no matter what. In most claims I handle, the pre-existing condition is something we all accumulate with age: degenerative disc disease, osteoarthritis in a knee, a prior rotator cuff repair, or a history of tension headaches. These conditions can be quiet for years. Then a crash violently loads the spine or wrenches a shoulder, and symptoms surge. The law in many states follows the eggshell plaintiff rule, which essentially says a wrongdoer takes the victim as they find them. If a light impact would not harm a perfectly healthy spine but triggers a serious flare in a vulnerable one, the at-fault driver still bears responsibility for the consequences of their negligence.

That said, the insurer will press the line between baseline and new harm. You will hear words like exacerbation, aggravation, and acceleration. Each carries a shade of meaning. Aggravation often describes a temporary flare of an existing condition. Acceleration suggests the crash pushed a slow burn into a faster deterioration. Both can be compensable, yet the value depends on medical clarity and credible proof.

How adjusters frame your history, and how to reframe it with facts

Insurers lean on three predictable moves. First, they argue your imaging looks “old.” Radiologists commonly note degenerative changes in the cervical and lumbar spine of adults by their 30s and 40s. That phrase becomes the insurer’s refrain. Second, they claim gaps in treatment show you were fine or that your symptoms resolved quickly. Third, they point to prior complaints in your primary care records as evidence that nothing changed.

The antidote is not confrontation. It is context. Degeneration on an MRI is common, and studies show a high percentage of asymptomatic adults have bulges or tears that never bothered them before a crash. What matters is your clinical picture. If before the crash you lifted groceries, worked full days, and slept through the night, and after the crash you need help with laundry, cut your hours, and wake from pain, that functional change matters more than an adjective in a radiology report. A thorough car accident lawyer will help your treating providers write accurate, detailed notes that capture those changes, rather than letting a claim revolve around a single imaging phrase.

Gaps in treatment need context too. Maybe you tried to push through with over-the-counter meds because you did not want to miss work, or you waited for an appointment due to scheduling or childcare. Honest explanations, documented early, neutralize the narrative that you “must have been fine.”

The pre-injury baseline is your anchor

When I ask clients about the weeks before a crash, I care about ordinary days. Did you walk your dog two miles without pain? Did you garden on weekends? Did you help an aging parent with errands? Specific, everyday details form your baseline. Without that anchor, an adjuster can claim your life looked the same before and after. With it, even small increases in pain or movement limits feel concrete.

Family and co-worker statements help here, as long as they are specific and not dramatic. “She used to carry case boxes at the store. After the crash, we moved her to the register because she could not lift more than 10 pounds” tends to carry weight. So do time-stamped messages you sent to friends about missing a workout or canceling plans because your neck locked up. A personal injury attorney will gather these without turning your case into a paperwork swamp, focusing on the two or three pieces that tell your story best.

Honesty about your history is non-negotiable

Clients sometimes worry that admitting to prior pain will tank their case. Hiding it is far worse. Defense lawyers will search medical records going back years. If they find a mention of “chronic low back pain” that you denied, your credibility takes a hit that bleeds into every disputed detail. The better path is candor: yes, you had occasional back tightness after long days, you managed it with stretching, and you never missed work for it. After the collision, you needed physical therapy twice a week for two months, then a targeted injection, and you missed 30 hours of work. That contrast is compelling. Juries reward people who tell the full story without hedging.

Medical documentation that actually moves the needle

The strongest cases do not rely on generic doctor notes that say “patient reports pain, 6 out of 10.” They include focused documentation that links cause to effect. I often work with treating providers to address four simple questions in their charting or a narrative letter.

• What was the patient’s baseline function before the crash?
• What new symptoms or objective findings appeared after the crash?
• How does the mechanism of injury plausibly aggravate the known condition?
• What treatment was necessary due to the aggravation, and what is the prognosis?

That third point matters. A rear-end impact that forces the neck into rapid flexion and extension can aggravate a previously quiet cervical disc bulge by inflaming surrounding ligaments and joints, leading to radiculopathy down the arm. When a physician connects those dots in everyday language, an adjuster’s “this is old” line loses steam.

Objective findings help, even if they are subtle. A positive Spurling’s test, reduced grip strength measured across visits, or diminished reflexes draw a picture beyond “it hurts.” Serial measurements matter more than one-time exams. Your car accident attorney will often suggest that your provider include range-of-motion numbers and functional tests at several points, so improvement or lack of it becomes visible over time.

Imaging helps, but not the way people think

MRI and X-rays rarely give a clean answer. A tear might predate the crash, or the radiologist may describe “degenerative” changes even when a fresh injury inflames the area. Imaging can still help if viewed in context. If you had an MRI two years before the crash showing mild degeneration without nerve compression, then a post-crash MRI shows a larger herniation abutting a nerve root, the differential is obvious. Even when pre-injury imaging does not exist, the pattern of symptoms can bridge the gap. Insurers love pictures, but juries follow narratives grounded in medicine. The goal is to let both align.

How aggravation influences claim value

Aggravation claims come in shades. A two-week flare that resolves with conservative care has value, but not as much as a permanent worsening. Expect an insurer to start at the low end for short flares, sometimes only offering the cost of treatment plus a small amount for pain. When an aggravation pushes someone into new territory, like making surgery necessary sooner than it would have been, the numbers grow. I have seen fair settlements range widely, from a few thousand dollars for a quick recovery to six figures where an aggravated condition triggers a lasting limitation and clear wage loss. The facts drive the outcome, not a formula.

Two things often move value. First, the quality and consistency of your treatment. Sporadic visits and missed appointments feed the argument that you were not hurt. Second, functional losses tied to your job or daily life. If you are a dental hygienist whose neck flare-up reduces your ability to lean forward and work in awkward positions, or a warehouse worker who can no longer meet lifting requirements, that real-world impact raises both economic and human damages.

Special issues with common pre-existing conditions

Spine degeneration is the most common backdrop. So are shoulder and knee issues.

Cervical and lumbar spine: Degeneration shows up in most adults by midlife. A crash can convert an asymptomatic bulge into symptomatic radiculopathy. Document dermatomal pain patterns, strength deficits, and response to nerve blocks. Insurers will argue “natural progression,” so your physician’s explanation of why your timeline jumped is crucial.

Shoulders: Partial rotator cuff tears, impingement, and labral fraying often exist before symptoms. A forceful seat belt restraint or bracing on the steering wheel can aggravate these. Range-of-motion deficits, positive impingement tests, and functional tasks like overhead reach are persuasive details. If an MRI shows increased tearing or fluid consistent with acute aggravation, highlight it.

Knees: Prior meniscal repairs or arthritis can flare after a dashboard impact or pivot while bracing. Swelling documented within 48 to 72 hours carries weight. Functional evidence, like difficulty with stairs or squatting, reads more clearly than a radiology adjective.

Headaches and concussions: People with migraine history worry that post-crash headaches will be dismissed. A well-documented change in frequency, intensity, and triggers helps. If you went from two mild migraines a month to three severe episodes a week with photophobia after a rear-end crash, that change is compensable if tied to an acute cervical strain or mild traumatic brain injury. A neurologist’s opinion often proves decisive.

The role of early legal guidance

A car accident lawyer should not turn your medical care into a script, but they can help you avoid pitfalls. They will urge you to report all symptoms at the first visit, even small ones, because delayed complaints look suspect. They will ask your provider to avoid vague phrases like “chronic pain” without noting the timing of the flare. They will track out-of-pocket costs and time off work from day one, so you are not recreating it months later. Most importantly, they will create a record that distinguishes between your past and your present.

When I meet a client with a medical history, I map the claim around three timelines. The first is pre-injury function. The second is acute treatment, focusing on the first 12 weeks when insurers are most skeptical. The third is long-term outcome, including residuals at six to twelve months. If residuals exist, I look for a treating doctor who will quantify them, not just describe them, such as a 10 to 15 percent permanent impairment or a specific lifting restriction. Those numbers, tied to credible evidence, often open settlement doors that stay closed with generic narratives.

How recorded statements and forms can hurt, and how to handle them

Adjusters often request recorded statements early. People try to be helpful and end up minimizing symptoms because they think they will recover quickly. Then the tape becomes Exhibit A when the pain lingers. If you already gave a statement that glossed over issues, do not panic. Follow up with a written clarification as symptoms evolve, and let your personal injury attorney handle future communications. If you have not given one, consider declining politely until after a medical evaluation, or do it with your lawyer present to keep the focus on facts.

Watch intake forms at urgent care or primary care visits. Boxes for “chronic” versus “acute” and multi-choice pain diagrams can pigeonhole your case if filled out hastily. It is fine to note that you previously had occasional stiffness, as long as you also mark that current symptoms began after the crash and feel different. If English is not your first language, ask for translation help. Ambiguities at this stage are hard to unwind later.

When a prior claim or injury crosses paths with the new one

If you filed a claim in the past, the defense will request those records. That is not fatal. What matters is whether you reached a stable baseline before the new incident. I once represented a delivery driver who settled a neck strain claim years earlier, then functioned without medical visits for more than a year. A subsequent crash brought new radicular symptoms that required injections and work restrictions. The earlier claim did not sink the second; the gap and the change made the difference.

Similarly, if you were in a crash after the one at issue, disclosure and clarity matter. Your lawyer will parse apportionment, showing which symptoms came from which event. Courts and juries are used to the idea that life is messy. Trying to hide overlapping events makes it look worse than it is.

Practical steps you can take in the first 30 days

Use this short checklist to ground your claim without overcomplicating your life.

• Get evaluated within 24 to 72 hours and describe every symptom, even if mild.
• Tell your provider about your pre-injury baseline in concrete terms, not just “fine.”
• Follow through on referrals and home exercises, and keep appointments when possible.
• Keep a simple symptom and function log for 4 to 6 weeks, focusing on sleep, work, and daily tasks.
• Save pay stubs, time-off records, and receipts for out-of-pocket costs in one folder.

You do not need a leather-bound journal or an app. A few sentences every couple of days capture the arc better than a perfect essay written weeks later.

What a fair settlement might include when you have a pre-existing condition

A comprehensive demand in an aggravation case typically includes medical bills tied to the crash, projected future care if symptoms persist, wage loss and reduced earning capacity if applicable, and non-economic damages for pain, functional loss, and loss of enjoyment. If an aggravation forces earlier surgery, the valuation includes the medical cost and the future risk of revision procedures. If it accelerates arthritis progression, an orthopedist can explain that timeline and its practical impact.

Expect pushback on “causation” and “reasonableness” of treatment. Insurers sometimes argue that certain therapies were “excessive” or “unrelated.” Your attorney’s job is to show that treatment tracked medical advice and produced measurable benefits, or that lack of benefit justified next steps. Clear causation opinions from treating doctors carry more weight than hired experts in many cases. Still, there are times when a neutral specialist or an independent biomechanics opinion helps, for example when the crash looked minor but the injury was significant.

When to consider filing suit

Most cases settle, but some claims with pre-existing conditions need litigation to get fair value. Filing suit does not guarantee trial, and many settle during discovery. Litigation allows your lawyer to depose treating physicians, locking in testimony about aggravation and prognosis. It also compels the defense to produce data on the crash, such as black box speed or photos that were not shared earlier. The decision to sue weighs cost, time, and stress against the gap in value. If an offer ignores clear aggravation and lasting impact, filing suit may be the step that turns a dismissive posture into a realistic negotiation.

Working with your doctor without turning them into an advocate

Treating physicians are not hired guns. Jurors trust them because they focus on care. Your car accident attorney should respect that role. The best approach is to help doctors document facts they already know, not script words. Provide them with a concise summary of your pre-injury baseline and post-crash changes. Ask for clarity on causation only if they feel comfortable, and accept it if they say they cannot be certain. Many states use “more likely than not” as the standard for medical causation, roughly a 51 percent threshold. If a doctor can say your crash more likely than not aggravated your condition, and explain why, that supports your claim without compromising their integrity.

How juries actually react to pre-existing conditions

Jurors bring their own aches and histories into the box. That can cut both ways. Some think, “Everyone has back pain.” Others think, “If that happened to me, I would be furious.” What sways them is not a perfect body but a credible story. They respond to the person who kept working through pain until car accident lawyer atlanta-accidentlawyers.com it became too much, who followed medical advice, who shows up and tells the truth about good days and bad days. I have watched juries acknowledge aggravation generously when the plaintiff’s daily life is clearly different than it was. I have also watched them discount a case where records felt sloppy or the plaintiff seemed evasive. Credibility is the currency.

Common mistakes that undermine good cases

Three missteps show up again and again. Minimizing symptoms at the start, then reporting a spike only after speaking with a lawyer, makes the claim look coached. Skipping prescribed therapy without explanation suggests disinterest or secondary gain. Social media contradictions, like posting about a strenuous hike while reporting severe limitations, are gift-wrapped exhibits for the defense. None of these are fatal alone, but together they erode trust. If you can do an activity on a good day, fine, but do not brag or make it look effortless. Context matters, and online posts strip it out.

How a personal injury attorney shapes the path forward

A good personal injury attorney respects your health, your time, and your story. They will meet you where you are, not where a template puts you. If you are a single parent juggling shifts and physical therapy, they will set a plan that fits your schedule. If you are a retiree with long-standing arthritis that just went from background noise to daily frustration, they will focus on quality of life and independence. Their work includes gathering medical narratives, coordinating with your employer on documentation, negotiating medical liens, and translating the mess of records into a coherent demand that an adjuster or jury can follow.

If your claim involves a car crash, a car accident lawyer brings additional tools: traffic investigation, event data recorder downloads when available, and accident reconstruction if liability is disputed. They also anticipate common carrier tactics, like quick low offers paired with statements that your degeneration makes you “high risk” for pain no matter what. The response is calm and documented, not emotional.

Final thoughts from the trenches

Pre-existing conditions do not bar recovery. They complicate the story and increase the need for clean, consistent proof. If you were managing life before, then a negligent act tipped you into new pain, limits, or care, the law gives you a path to be made whole. That path is narrower when records are vague and broader when they are detailed. It rewards honesty, early attention to small details, and a steady approach to treatment. It benefits from a lawyer who knows when to push and when to pause, who knows how to read a radiology report and how to translate a functional loss into dollars that reflect real life.

Your body is not a blank slate. It is a history of everything you have done and endured. If someone makes that history harder to carry, you do not have to shoulder the extra weight alone.