Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this automobile accident case and its proceedings.)
Starting with what plaintiff would have earned if not injured in the automobile collision and subtracting what she is able to earn now that she is partially disabled, the future lost income submitted to the jury was $347,352.00.
It was also established that because of plaintiff’s partial disability, her ability to contribute household services was diminished by 8 hours a week. Projecting forward to age 65, Mr. Stevens testified that the economic value for the loss of those services was $220,064.00.
It is noteworthy that although defendant complains that the award of economic damages was excessive, her motion for a new trial is conspicuous by its failure to assert that plaintiff’s expert analysis of economic loss was incorrect, no less any suggestion as to why that might be so. Simply because Dr. W. could find no medical reason why plaintiff was unable to work for the amount of time she claimed is no reason to set aside the jury’s conclusion that plaintiff’s witness had established such a medical reason for a past wage loss and future economic losses.
The Court Should Not Remit the Award of Damages
Clearly, the defendant is not happy with the jury’s verdict and award of damages. A party’s disappointment with the trial result is no reason for a court to issue a remittitur. Defendant makes no claim that the jury was improperly instructed, that evidence was improperly admitted, or that the jurors engaged in misconduct. Rather, defendant asserts because that a properly instructed jury that heard properly admitted evidence and, upon due deliberation, awarded substantial damages, the court should remit the award because defendant presented evidence at odds with the jury’s resolution of this case. The contention is lacks merit and should be rejected. The motion for new trial should be denied.
CONCLUSION
The weight of the evidence introduced at trial supports the jury’s finding for the plaintiff and substantial evidence regarding plaintiff’s permanent neck injury, medical expenses, lost income, future medical expenses, loss of future income, and general damages was presented to support the jury’s award of $306,500.00.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.