Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)
DAMAGES
As to Alexandra, the damage to his body speaks for itself. Plaintiffs presented substantial and credible evidence on this issue with the testimony of Dr. Peter W., Dr. Nathaniel T., Dr. Paul U., and Dr. Marilyn S.. All testified to the nature and extent of the severe and permanent injuries suffered by Alexandra, and Dr. W. testified to those things that Alexandra will need in the future by way of the life care plan.
Plaintiffs additionally presented substantial and credible evidence with Dr. David R. and Mr. Anastos concerning the nature and extent of Alexandra’s disability as it related to his ability to work and the economic impact of that disability.
The jury obviously carefully considered the plaintiffs’ expert witness testimony and the defense expert witness testimony and reached a compromise on the economic damages suffered by Alexandra. The award was reasonable and in line with the substantial and credible evidence produced by plaintiffs.
As to general damages, it was the jury’s judgment that Mrs. Brown suffered $1,000,000.00 in general damages being witness to the injuries suffered by her child at birth and dealing with those injuries and their sequela.
Mrs. Brown suffered the death of Alexandra’s brother shortly after delivery by Dr. Linda X. (prior to Alexandra’s delivery) and Mrs. Brown knew at the time Alexandra was being delivered that she was being injured and feared that she would suffer the death of another baby. Mrs. Brown thereafter learned that her child was severely injured and that the injury was permanent. It is hard to imagine a more devastating emotional injury to a mother. This evidence was not rebutted by the defendant.
It was the jury’s judgment that this was substantial damage to Mrs. Brown and awarded $1,000,000.00, not knowing that she would only be able to recover one-quarter of that under California Law. The jury’s judgment is supported by the facts and law.
CONCLUSION
There is no credible admissible evidence that there was any juror misconduct and assuming arguendo that misconduct occurred, that such misconduct lead to an improper verdict. The damages were not excessive and all damage awards are supported by substantial and credible evidence. Sadly the jury’s award after hearing the evidence and applying the law will be reduced by law saving ABC Insurance Company $1,500,000.00. A windfall to the insurance company that forced this trial and an injustice to plaintiffs.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.