-
03 Feb ' 21:01
$3,000,000 for 11 Months of Pre-Death Pain and Suffering Affirmed in Medical Malpractice Case
Posted on January 30, 2011 byTheresa Capwell was 33 years old and in good health when she started experiencing abdominal pain. She was diagnosed with pancreatitis (an inflammation of the pancreas) and admitted to Westchester Medical Center on September 18, 2000.
Within five days of her hospital admission, Theresa suffered acute respiratory distress and she was placed on a ventilator. On October 4th, she suffered a heart attack and brain damage from lack of oxygen (anoxic brain damage).
As a result of the anoxia, she was in a persistent vegetative state from which she never recovered and Theresa Capwell died 11 months later on September 10, 2001.
A medical malpractice lawsuit followed - Capwell v. Guneratne (Supreme Court, Westchester County, Index #14832/02) - in which plaintiffs (Theresa's husband and their three young daughters) claimed that her brain damage and death were caused by mistreatment of her pancreatitis and mismanagement of her respiratory condition.
Essentially, plaintiffs argued that the doctors at Westchester Medical Center failed to recognize that Theresa's problems stemmed from pancreatitis. Instead, they erroneously suspected and treated her for ovarian cancer. That misdiagnosis led to a cascade of ever worsening medical problems: Theresa got sicker and sicker and ultimately suffered from life threatening respiratory distress that led to a ventilator placement, a tension pneumothorax, a heart attack and anoxic brain damage. Then, death.
The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff's favor on December 12, 2008 finding that the hospital's malpractice had caused Theresa's injuries and they awarded $7,000,000 in damages as follows:
- pre-death pain and suffering - $3,000,000 (11 months)
- loss of consortium - $4,000,000 (11 months)
The defense made a post-trial motion challenging the verdict amounts as excessive. The plaintiffs countered that they were reasonable and asserted their own challenge for the jury's failure to award any wrongful death damages (i.e., economic losses sustained by the family members due to Theresa's death, such as the value of her household services and parental guidance). In a , the judge rejected the defense claim that the pain and suffering award was excessive but agreed that the loss of consortium award was excessive and should be reduced - to .
Also, the trial judge agreed with plaintiffs that there should be a new trial on the issue of wrongful death damages - that is, whether, in addition to causing Ms. Capwell's pre-death injuries, the malpractice also caused her death. If so, her family may be entitled to substantial additional economic damages, most significantly loss of parental guidance for the 7, 9 and 11 year old girls.
defendant appealed. This week, in Capwell v. Muslim (the name of the case after some defendants were dismissed) (2d Dept. 2011), the appellate court affirmed the trial judge's decision.
Plaintiffs argued, successfully, that $3,000,000 is a reasonable sum for pain and suffering in this case because, as a result of the brain damage until her death 11 months later, Theresa Capwell was:
- confined to her bed
- lived out her days cared for by others in every aspect of her existence
- could not communicate with the outside world beyond facial expressions, hand squeezing, eye movements and following simple commands (like moving her feet)
The affirmance of a $3,000,000 pre-death pain and suffering for a period of 11 months is quite significant. Generally, pain and suffering awards in brain damage cases that are sustained in excess of $1,000,000 involve much longer periods of time, such as:
- Reed v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2003) - $5,000,000 ($2,500,000 past - 6 years, $2,500,000 future - 30 years); 43 year old; brain damage with progressive tissue loss in lobes
- Paek v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2006) - $4,300,000 ($1,300,000 past - 6 years, $3,000,000 future - 40 years); 36 year old; traumatic brain injury with severe cognitive dysfunction
- Weldon v. Beal (2d Dept. 2000) - $5,000,000 ($2,000,000 past - 12 years, $3,000,000 future - 15 years); 26 year old; anoxic brain damage
- Evans v. St. Mary's Hospital ($800,000 past - 13 years, $1,000,000 future - 31 years); 28 year old; anoxic brain damage
Plaintiffs argued that while Theresa's period of suffering was much less than those in most cases involving multi-million dollar pain and suffering awards for brain damage, the distinctive factor in this case is that the 11 month period represented the remainder of plaintiff's life. Thus, they cited Cepeda v. New York City Health and Hospitals Corp. (1st Dept. 2003) in which $750,000 was held reasonable for an infant who died 12 days after suffering severe brain damage at birth due to medical malpractice. In that case, the court found that the fact that decedent experienced pain and suffering for most of her life was a factor in assessing the pain and suffering award.
Interestingly, neither party discussed the relevance of a recent case - Schaffer v. Batheja (2d Dept. 2010), about which we wrote in detail, here. In that case, the court approved a pre-death pain and suffering award of $2,500,000 for a woman in a coma who was only sporadically aware of her condition (she'd lapsed into a coma due to medical malpractice) for the 4 1/2 years until she died.The distinction between these two cases appears to be that the court determined that Ms. Capwell's level of awareness was much more significant than Mrs. Schaffer's.
$1,000,000 loss of consortium award was based upon the fact that Scott and Theresa Capwell had enjoyed an idyllic 11 year marriage described by him as "the perfect life." They raised three young girls (Theresa was the homemaker, Scott the bread winner), enjoyed a very intimate relationship and were in "bliss." After the malpractice, for 11 months, their entire relationship consisted of his visiting her in the hospital, touching her face and kissing her in an effort to relax her, playing her favorite television shows and watching her deteriorate and die. The testimony in this regard was quite poignant and the appellate judges declined to disturb the trial judge's reduction of the jury award for loss of consortium from $4,000,000 to $1,000,000.
- As to pain and suffering, the defense argued not only that $3,000,000 is excessive but also that Theresa was already suffering from numerous underlying health problems when she entered the hospital and that plaintiffs failed to prove she sustained new, different or exacerbated pain and suffering.
- Plaintiffs' law firm, Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, is widely recognized as one of the top medical malpractice firms in the state.
- The loss of parental guidance claims belonging to Theresa Capwell's three young daughters could add several million dollars more to the plaintiffs' recovery in this case. As much as $1,500,000 has been held reasonable by an appellate court for loss of a young child's parental guidance (Paccione v. Greenberg - 2d Dept. 1998). If the new jury in Capwell v. Muslim finds a causal connection between the malpractice and the death and determines to award parental guidance damages, the size of the awards in this case may break new ground.
Emotional Distress Damages for Morgue's Mishandling of Body - $400,000 Approved by Appellate Court
Posted on January 27, 2011 byGeorge Jones died on November 21, 2003 at the age of 51 years. His body was found (alone) two days later in his Bronx apartment and taken to the city's medical examiner's office (the morgue) where an autopsy determined he'd died of natural causes. His mother, Lucille Jones, was notified and two of her other children went to the morgue for the grim purpose of identifying their brother.
Mrs. Jones then planned a wake and an open casket funeral for November 28th. On November 25th, though, when the funeral director showed up at the morgue to pick up the body, he was advised that the body of Mr. Jones was missing from the morgue. For more than a week, his whereabouts were unknown.
Eventually, on December 2nd, Mrs. Jones was informed that her son had been transported out of state and buried in a potter's filed in Pennsylvania. It turned out that the morgue had negligently released the body of Mr. Jones to the wrong funeral home - one that had come to pick up the body of a different man (named Jorge Jones).
A proper funeral for George Jones was never held. He was exhumed and returned to New York but by then his body was badly decomposed and he had to be cremated on December 8th.
Mrs. Jones brought a lawsuit -- Jones v. City of New York (Supreme Court, Bronx County; Index # 8009/05) -- in which she claimed emotional distress damages caused by the city's wrongful interference with her right to the immediate possession of her son's body for burial and her ability to see him one last time and pay proper respect.
Liability against the city was determined in May 2008 in a motion for summary judgment decisionand then, on February 13, 2009, after a two day trial solely on the issue of damages, the jury awarded Mrs. Jones for her emotional distress pain and suffering.
As to her emotional distress damages, Mrs. Jones testified that:
- she was devastated upon learning that her son's body was missing
- the cremation of her eldest son had a profound effect upon her
- normally a lively woman who loved to cook and play with her grandchildren, she was not herself for more than a year
- lost more than 40 pounds
After the trial, the defendant argued that the damages award was excessive but the trial judge issued a decision on August 24, 2009 denying the motion. An appeal followed.
Now, in Jones v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2011), the appellate court has ruled that $800,000 is excessive and that there should be a reduction to$400,000.
Despite the substantial reduction by the appellate court, the $400,000 award is substantial and significant:
- The two prior appeals court decisions cited by the court ruling on damages in similar cases could have led the judges to slash the verdict even further. In Duffy v. City of New York (1st Dept. 1991), a $1,500,000 verdict was reduced to for the negligent withholding of the news of the death of plaintiff's son for 18 months, thereby depriving plaintiff of the right to take possession of the body for a proper burial. And in Emeagwali v. Brooklyn Hospital Center (2d Dept. 2009), pain and suffering damages for parents in the sum of $1,900,000 were reduced to $350,000 where the defendant improperly disposed the remains of a stillborn fetus, thereby depriving the plaintiffs of a chance to conduct a religious burial ceremony for their child and causing them emotional distress.
- Plaintiff offered no medical testimony at all substantiating her claims of emotional distress. She'd neither treated with any physician or therapist nor sought counseling from, or even described the events to, her pastor with whom she was very close. In Emeagwali v. Brooklyn Hospital Center, for example, there was extensive testimony from a physician as to the mother's psychological injuries, including severe depression and inability to leave the house. The defense sought to make much of the lack of any similar corroborating testimony to support the emotional distress claims of Mrs. Jones but the jury was obviously unimpressed with that argument and convinced of the genuineness of plaintiff's claims.
- In his closing argument, the defense attorney suggested that plaintiff was exaggerating her damages for financial gain and that plaintiff's "sadness" may be worth no money at all, just a heartfelt apology.
- In her closing argument, plaintiff's attorney Denise M. Dunleavy took umbrage with the defense suggestion that an apology is all that's owed and advised the jurors that the verdict sheet they'd soon be handed to complete has a provision only for money damages, "the only way the city will give a heartfelt apology."
Pre-Death Pain and Suffering Verdict of $3,500,000 Upheld on Appeal in Death of Ten Year Old Girl
Posted on January 25, 2011 byAnna Gloria Rivera was born in 1988 and within three months she was diagnosed with asthma (a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways). Growing up, she used a nebulizer with Albuterol to alleviate her symptoms but from time to time suffered from asthma attacks that would sometimes end up with emergency room treatment before she'd be released back to her home, school and an otherwise normal life of a young kid.
In the early morning hours of December 21, 1998, though, Anna suffered a severe asthmatic episode and was rushed by ambulance to a city hospital, Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center.
After four hours and forty-five minutes of frantic treatment, during which she was restrained to a hospital bed, Anna's lung collapsed and she died due to tension pneumothorax.
In the ensuing lawsuit , Rivera v. City of New York (Supreme Court, Kings County; Index # 6288/00), the hospital and its doctors and technicians were found to have committed malpractice because they:
- administered oxygen at an excessive rate
- failed to manage intubation properly resulting in extubation and re-intubation
- failed to administer sedatives and paralytics
The jury awarded pre-death pain and suffering damages in the sum of $3,500,000 based on evidence that during the 4 3/4 hours that Anna was being worked on at the hospital she endured excruciating pain and panic, especially as she fought, her arms and legs restrained in bed, against the treatment and her breathing difficulties.
Here is an endotracheal tube, like the one doctors inserted into Anna's airway to try to save her:
$3,500,000 verdict has now been upheld on appeal in Rivera v. City of New York (2d Dept. 2011).
The appellate court decision failed to mention of the underlying facts as to Anna's pain and suffering. Nor did the court compare this award with similar cases.
During the terrible final few hours of Anna Rivera's life, she suffered enormous physical pain and terror from
- unrelenting pain while gasping for air and struggling to survive;
- extreme fright, anxiety and confusion at not being allowed the presence of and comfort from her parents
- panic and fear from being physically restrained to the bed without the paralytic and sedatives
- choking and gagging from the endotracheal tube while having to endure the invasive intubation procedures three times without anesthetics, sedatives and muscle relaxants
- severe agitation from fighting and bucking against the endotracheal tube
Here are the cases relied upon by the plaintiff in arguing, successfully, that the $3,500,000 pain and suffering verdict is reasonable and should not be modified downward:- Lubecki v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2003) - $3,000,000 for pre-impact terror and other injuries in shooting of a hostage who died one hour later
- Twersky v. Busch for pain during of consciousness after car accident
- for of conscious pain from multiple fractures and internal injuries in car accident before death on the operating table 35 minutes later
- The appellate court also ruled that plaintiff's claim for pecuniary damages should not have been dismissed by the trial judge. Even though Anna died at the age of 10 years, her mother should have been permitted to present to the jury her claim for lost future potential economic support. The court cited Parilis v. Feinstein (Court of Appeals 1980) in which $50,000 in pecuniary damages was affirmed in the case of a 12 year old boy's death. In Rivera v. City of New York, there was evidence that Anna was quite accomplished academically and helped out around the house with chores and the like. While an appellate court would not likely sustain much more than a low six figure verdict in this instance, plaintiff may proceed to a new trial for additional damages on this claim alone if the parties do not now settle the pecuniary damage claim.
Knee Injury Pain and Suffering Verdict Increased on Appeal to $1,400,000
Posted on January 16, 2011 byAngelo Diaz reported to work at 5:15 a.m. on July 15, 2002 at the New York City Department of Sanitation's maintenance garage in Manhattan. The then 40 year old Diaz was going about his work for an hour or so moving trucks from the garage (like the one seen below) to the street outside when he stepped out of one of the trucks and slipped on oil or grease on the truck's interior step.
Mr. Diaz twisted and banged his left ankle and knee, resulting in severe pain. He was taken to the local hospital where he was treated, diagnosed with an ankle sprain and released with a cane. His ankle got better and he returned to work within three weeks but then his knee was more painful and unstable
Shortly thereafter, an MRI revealed a torn meniscus in his knee.
Diaz never returned to work and in early 2003 started a lawsuit (Diaz v. City of New York -Supreme Court, New York County, Index #116703/03) to recover money damages for his pain and suffering, medical expenses and lost earnings.
Trial was held over 10 days in September 2008 and the jury returned a verdict 100% in plaintiff's favor. The defendant was found negligent in that the worksite was in an unsafe condition; in particular, grease was left inside of the truck.
The jury then determined that plaintiff was entitled to pain and suffering damages in the sum of $950,000 ($800,000 past - 6 years, $150,000 future - 31 years). Plaintiff was also awarded significant sums for his future loss of earnings and medical expenses.
city appealed the verdict claiming there was no basis for finding negligence. And plaintiff cross-appealed claiming that the future damages award ($150,000 for 31 years) was too low.
Now, in Diaz v. City of New York (1st Dept. 2011), the plaintiff's position has been vindicated on both accounts. The appellate judges affirmed the liability finding and increased the future damages award to $600,000
total pain and suffering award is now $1,400,000 (with the total verdict for all damage items adjusted to $2,672,433 considering the appellate court's modifications to the earnings and medical expenses awarded by the jury).
The appellate court was clearly impressed by medical testimony establishing that Diaz's knee injuries are permanent, necessitated four arthroscopic partial menisectomies - surgical procedures to remove part of the torn meniscus from the knee joint - and that he will require knee replacement surgeries in the future.
The fourth arthroscopic surgery involved an osteochondral transplant to the medial femoral condyle using a bone plug.
.jpg)
Within two years of the accident, Diaz was declared disabled from his job by his employer. And, by the date of trial, he could still not work in a similar capacity (as a sanitation or construction worker), or do any work that required lifting, bending or squatting. His pain and knee stability were better but he still had pain every day under his patella (the kneecap) and could not play or coach baseball, ride a bicycle, or dance, all of which had previously played a big part in his life.
Plaintiff's treating orthopedic surgeon explained to the jury how the meniscus is the shock absorber of the knee and that its removal increases the risk of further injury to the knee. He said that Diaz was already already suffering from quadriceps atrophy, patellofemoral syndrome (grinding of the kneecap against the femur) and post-traumatic arthritis and it was "highly likely" that he will require at least one partial knee replacement and two total knee replacements during his lifetime.
- Plaintiff's trial attorney, Jonathan Michaels of Pena & Kahn, succeeded in winning just about every courtroom battle in this hotly contested case. He obtained missing witness charges, preclusion of evidence of plaintiff's prior ankle injury and permission to claim damages for clinical depression without the testimony of a mental health expert.
- Plaintiff's third surgery, in 2007, was brought about by a new accident - his knee buckled as he stepped off a curb.
- defense did not present any medical witnesses (relying instead merely on cross-examination of plaintiff's doctor).
- $700,000 reduction in the future loss of earnings claim resulted from a mathematical error by the jury.
- appellate judges cited two cases to support their ruling that $150,000 was inadequate for future pain and suffering damages - Kelly v. City (1st Dept. 2004) and Calzado v. New York City Tr. Auth.(1st Dept. 2003). In Calzado, $700,000 was affirmed for future pain and suffering over 32 years for a woman with knee ligament and meniscal tears requiring future knee replacement surgery. That case is quite relevant. In Kelly, though, $57,000 was affirmed for future pain and suffering damages for a 37 year old man with similar injuries. That case appears irrelevant. More relevant would have been a reliance upon Smith v. Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Op. Auth. (1st Dept. 2009) in which was affirmed for future pain and suffering over 40 years in a similar torn meniscus case (i.e., two surgeries to date and knee replacement needed in the future).
Shoulder Injury Pain and Suffering Verdict - $250,000 Upheld after Malpractice by Attorneys
Posted on January 12, 2011 byRosalie David, a 57 year old schoolteacher, was a front seat passenger in a car driven by her husband on January 25, 2003 in Cortlandt Manor, New York. Waiting to make a left turn, their car was rear ended by a car driven by Dennis Astrologo.
Complaining of pain in her right shoulder, Mrs. David was taken by ambulance to the local hospital where she was x-rayed (negative), treated (with a sling and pain medication) and released.
She followed up with an orthopedic surgeon three days later and he immediately ordered an MRI which revealed a full thickness rotator cuff tear
A week later, Mrs. David underwent surgery to repair her rotator cuff.
In the meantime, on February 3, 2003, Mrs. David retained lawyers to pursue her claim for injuries arising out of the accident. They filed suit on June 9, 2003. Mistakenly, though, the lawyers filed in the wrong court - the Civil Court of the City of New York, a court in which the maximum recovery is $25,000.
When her lawyers realized their mistake, it was too late. They sought permission from the Supreme Court to transfer the case to that court but their application was denied and that denial was upheld on appeal.
She then engaged new counsel and successfully sued the lawyers for malpractice. In that case (David v. Mallilo & Grossman (Supreme Court, New York County, Index # 107490/06), a motion for summary judgment was granted in plaintiff's favor and upheld on appeal - it was easily determined that the law firm committed malpractice.
A trial was then held in which, as in all attorney malpractice cases, plaintiff then had to prove that she would have won her underlying car accident lawsuit. Further, she had to prove what her financial recovery would have been.
The liability element was easily resolved in Mrs. David's favor (this was a rear-ender car accident) but the issue of damages was hotly contested before the trial judge awarded pain and suffering damages in the sum of $250,000.
It turns out that five days before the car accident Mrs. David bruised her right shoulder in a minor slip and fall incident and that she sought medical attention from noted orthopedic surgeon, Jacob D. Rozbruch, M.D., the day before the car accident. He diagnosed her with acute bursitis, arthritis and a possible rotator cuff tear. He injected her with lidocaine and kenalog.
At trial, Dr. Rozbruch testified that it was the car accident alone that was the immediate cause of the rotator cuff tendon tear because of the significant change in her examination between her initial visit the day before the car accident and her subsequent visit a few days thereafter. He said that before the car accident Mrs. David's muscle strength was perfectly normal and that the injections had given her a good result.
defense presented two physicians, an orthopedic surgeon (Anjani Sinha, M.D.) and a neurologist (James Liguori, M.D.), each of whom examined Mrs. David four and a half years after the accident. They testified that her right shoulder injuries pre-existed the car accident. That testimony, though, was discounted by the trial judge because it contradicted written reports they had generated shortly after their examinations in which they had stated that it could not be determined whether the torn rotator cuff was related to the accident or was pre-existing.
The trial judge's decision to award $250,000 for pain and suffering has now been upheld on appeal in David v. Mallilo & Grossman (Appellate Term, 1st Dept. 2010). That award is within the range of recently sustained verdicts in rotator cuff surgery cases, as discussed by us most recently here
appellate judges noted that for several months after the accident plaintiff's injuries left her:
- restricted in bathing, dressing and household activities
- unable to drive, type, write on the blackboard or lift boxes at school where she worked
And Dr. Rozbruch opined that Mrs. David's shoulder injuries included:
- continued lack of full muscle strength, possibly permanent
- recurring subacromial bursitis and pain
- risk of recurrent tear of the rotator cuff with repeat surgery
- Mrs. David had been forced to accept $25,000 to settle her Civil Court lawsuit because that's the most one may sue for in that court.
- Pursuant to CPLR 325(d), the attorney malpractice lawsuit, commenced in Supreme Court, was tried in Civil Court but there was no limitation of monetary jurisdiction with respect to the $250,000 verdict. The parties consented to have the case tried by a judge instead of a jury.
- Plaintiff's husband was awarded $25,000 for his loss of consortium claim.
- In 2004, a $1,400,000 verdict was rendered against Mallilo & Grossman (in favor of another personal injury law firm) because a by-then disbarred associate had tapped into the plaintiff law firm's answering service to intercept calls from potential personal injury clients.
- Mrs. David was represented by Philip A. Greenberg in her attorney malpractice suit. Given the result he obtained and the extensive opposition he faced at every turn, his advocacy was outstanding.
Ankle Fracture Pain and Suffering Verdict for $400,000 Sent Back for Retrial on Liability Apportionment Only
Posted on January 6, 2011 byLeshai Ryals walked out from the rear door of a city bus on University Avenue in the Bronx on January 19, 2004 at about 11:30 a.m., took two steps in the street and then slipped on snow and ice. She broke her ankle and sued claiming that the bus driver was liable because, having failed to pull up to the bus stop (he dropped her off 10 to 15 feet from the curb), he breached his duty to provide her a reasonably safe place to disembark.
Here's a bus letting passengers off away from the curb but without any snow or ice in the street:
In Ryals v. New York City Transit Authority (Supreme Court, Bronx County, Index # 21244/04) the bus driver claimed that he could not pull up to the bus stop curb because it was blocked by an 18 wheeler milk truck whose operator was making a delivery to the C Town supermarket on the sidewalk.
At the trial in March 2009, the supermarket manager testified that there was space in front of the stop for the bus driver to park and that his employees had shoveled a path for people to get from the curb to the street. Based on that testimony, the trial judge granted plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict on liability. She ruled that the defendant was fully liable for the accident and therefore there was no need to submit that issue to the jury.
The only questions submitted to the jury were related to damages. They then awarded the 37 year old Ms. Ryals pain and suffering damages in the sum of ($250,000 past - 5 years, $150,000 future - 5 years).
The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial judge should have let the issue of liability be determined by the jury. The appellate court agreed and in Ryals v. New York City Tr. Auth. (1st Dept. 2010), the liability verdict has now been reversed and the matter remanded for a new jury trial on the issue of liability.
In general, trial judges may grant a motion for a directed verdict only when there is no rational process that would lead the jury to find for the non-moving party. In this case, the appellate judges stated that a rational jury could have rendered a defense verdict on liability - they could have found that the bus driver dropped off his passengers at the safest location under the circumstances.
appeals court did not disturb the $400,000 damages verdict so on retrial that figure will apply to the new liability verdict.
The decision did not, though, mention the injuries sustained by the plaintiff so here are the details:
- trimalleolar ankle fracture
- open reduction surgery with internal fixation of syndesmotic screws
- second surgery to remove the screws
- unable to work as telecommunications provider's manager for 3 1/2 months
The ankle joint is a hinge joint that consist of three bones: the tibia, the fibula and the talus
- The bottom (distal) end of the fibula forms the lateral malleolus which is the bump on the outside of the ankle.
- The distal end of the tibia forms the medial malleolus which is the bump on the inside of the ankle.
- And the posterior malleolus is the back of the tibia at the level of the ankle joint.
When all three malleoli are broken, it's called a trimalleolar fracture
The award in this case is in line with sustained awards for pain and suffering in other cases dealing with trimalleolar fractures, such as:
- Fishbane v. Chelsea Hall, LLC (2d Dept. 2009) - $550,000 for 69 year old [reduced from $800,000 jury verdict]
- Downes v. City of Mount Vernon (2d Dept. 2009) - $288,000 for 66 year old [discussed previously, here
- Robles v. City of New York (2d Dept. 2006) - $700,000 for 55 year old [reduced from $1,200,000 jury verdict]
- Sienicki v. 760 West End Avenue Owners, Inc. (1st Dept. 2005) - $250,000 [increased from $50,000 jury verdict]
- Uriondo v. Timberline Camplands, Inc, (1st Dept. 2005) - $315,000 for 40 year old
- Clark v. N-H Farms, Inc. (2d Dept. 2005) - $425,000 for 43 year old
- Guttierez v. City of New York (2d Dept. 2000) - $1,000,000 for 15 year old [reduced from $3,080,000 jury verdict]
- In addition to the transit authority and its driver, the plaintiff originally sued the supermarket on the theory that it bore concurrent responsibility for the accident because its employees were unloading the milk truck that blocked the bus stop. The claims against the supermarket were dismissed well before trial on a motion for summary judgment.
- There was no dispute at trial as to the general principle that city bus drivers are obligated to provide reasonably safe places for passengers to disembark. Here is PJI 2:166, the basic instruction trial judges give to jurors in such cases.
- $3,000,000 for 11 Months of Pre-Death Pain and Suffering Affirmed in Medical Malpractice Case
- Emotional Distress Damages for Morgue's Mishandling of Body - $400,000 Approved by Appellate Court
- Pre-Death Pain and Suffering Verdict of $3,500,000 Upheld on Appeal in Death of Ten Year Old Girl
- Knee Injury Pain and Suffering Verdict Increased on Appeal to $1,400,000
- Shoulder Injury Pain and Suffering Verdict - $250,000 Upheld after Malpractice by Attorneys
- Ankle Fracture Pain and Suffering Verdict for $400,000 Sent Back for Retrial on Liability Apportionment Only
Copyright © 2011, The Law Firm of John M. Hochfelder. All Rights Reserved.
Search the Site
