It can be assumed that if her lower vertebrae were broken, certainly removing her violently like described would have definitely finished the job of paralysis if the spinal cord wasn't damaged enough. That portion can be proven in court.
I'm sure the angle of impact and the subsequent path and position the car took could show how she describes her position and were her spinal cord received the damage and how her vertebrae were broken can adequately prove, though complexly, if removing her caused post-crash spinal damage. In fact, if the car didn't move much at all, it may be possible to prove undoubtedly that his removal caused the damage.
However, I think the lady is a very very mean b*tch for doing a lawsuit.
I also think that dude is an over-reactive "I watch too many movies" moron. Unlike inimalist, I think it's common knowledge not to move a person who has been in an accident...even if you are a professional. The douche probably smelled gasoline and watched one too many episodes of McGuyver.