-
30 Mar ' 09:54
Police Officer's Hand and Wrist Injury Result in $500,000 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed on Appeal
Posted on March 29, 2011 by John HochfelderOn October 9, 2005, Michael Nutley, a 35 year old New York City police officer on duty, slipped and fell on a New York City Transit Authority subway stairway at the 111th Street and Greenwood Avenue station in Queens.
Officer Nutley injured his dominant right hand and wrist and sued the NYCTA claiming that the sixth step of the stairway was cracked and missing concrete and that this defective step caused him to fall and injure himself. The jury substantially agreed finding that the defendant was 90% at fault (and that Nutley bore 10% of the responsibility for the accident and his injuries).
A trial on damages then ensued. After hearing testimony from plaintiff and medical experts for both sides, the jury awarded pain and suffering damages in the sum of $500,000 ($300,000 past - 3 years, $200,000 future - 30 years) and that award has now been affirmed on appeal in Nutley v. New York City Tr. Auth. (2d Dept. 2010).
The appellate court decision gives little information as to the injuries in this case other than to state that:
- the injury was to plaintiff's dominant hand and wrist, "required surgery," and
- "plaintiff continued to experience pain, numbness, tingling, loss of strength and loss of motion in his wrist and hand."
Here are the missing injury details:
- post-traumatic carpal tunnel syndrome, right wrist flexor tenosynovitis (an inflammation of the tendon and tendon sheath) requiring
- right carpal tunnel release surgery, right wrist flexor tenosynovectomy
During carpal tunnel surgery, a cut is made in the palm and the transverse carpal ligament is divided so that the size of the narrow tunnel-like structure in the wrist (formed by the carpal bones and ligament) is increased and the pressure on the nerve is decreased:
Officer Nutley was unable to work after the surgery for about five months and then returned first on a light duty basis for two months and thereafter without restrictions. Nonetheless, he had pain and disabilities continuing through trial, even worsening of his pre-surgical symptoms, including:
- pain
- diminished grip strength
- numbness and tingling
- burning sensation
Inside Information:
- Plaintiff was examined by an orthopedic surgeon for the defense, Raz Winiarsky, M.D., who testified that plaintiff fully recovered and was not at all disabled. Plaintiff's attorney attempted to discredit the doctor's testimony pointing out that he testified often for defendants (and particularly this defendant), suggesting that he routinely found that claimants were all better and referring to plaintiff's testimony that the exam lasted only two minutes.
- Plaintiff's expert, Louis C. Rose, M.D., previously a hand surgeon for the NYPD, testified that when he examined plaintiff almost two years after the accident plaintiff had significantly decreased ranges of motion, positive findings on both Tinel's test and Phelen's test and reduced grip strength. He opined that a second surgery would be the only way to address these injuries but it has a high rate of failure and therefore it's likely Nutley is permanently disabled. The defense pointed out that Dr. Rose saw plaintiff only once and that plaintiff's treating surgeon did not testify.
- Plaintiff's credibility was seriously attacked in view of his August 23, 2007 application to be a volunteer first responder to any future terrorist attacks in New York City. In the application, Nutley stated had no weakness in his hands. He testified that he understood the purpose of the application was to determine if he could carry and wear the extensive equipment required of a first responder and he thought he could do so and that had he stated otherwise he would not have been approved for the program.
- Plaintiff's counsel asked the jury for pain and suffering damages of $1,060,000 ($300,000 past, $760,000 future). Defense counsel did not suggest any figures.
Latest Trimalleolar Ankle Fracture Case - $625,000 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed
Posted on March 22, 2011 byMeghan Hopkins, a 22 year old graphic designer from Ohio, was visiting her boyfriend in New York City on July 31, 2006 when she tripped and fell on a defective walkway at the 14th Street subway station.
Meghan sustained a severe ankle fracture and sued the New York City Transit Authority claiming that the walkway was defective and unsafe (the concrete floor was cracked and raised) and that the defendant should have repaired it before the accident. On September 10, 2009, a Manhattan jury found the defendant 100% at fault.
The jury then assessed plaintiff's pain and suffering damages and awarded her $625,000 ($350,000 past - 3 years, $275,000 future - 55 years).
In Hopkins v. New York City Tr. Auth. (1st Dept. 2011) the entire $625,000 award has been upheld by the appellate court which rejected the defense claim that the award was excessive.
As noted in the court's decision, plaintiff sustained a trimalleolar fracture and had to undergo two surgeries:
- an open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with two metal plates, two long pins and eight screws to secure the plates
- removal of the hardware almost three years later
Ms. Hopkins testified that she continued to have trouble with stairs, lifting heavy objects and driving, has pain if she walks too much and can no longer run or engage in any sports.
Plaintiff's treating orthopedic surgeon testified that three years post-accident she already had signs of early post-traumatic arthritis and that her prognosis is poor. It's likely, he said, that Meghan will develop arthritis and then she'll need more surgery (such as an ankle fusion).
.jpg)
The main case cited by the court in Hopkins is Ruiz v. Hart Elm Corp. (2d Dept. 2007), in which $900,000 was affirmed for a 22 year old woman with severe bimalleolar fractures and obliterated ligaments resulting in three surgeries (ORIF and two hardware removals) and the inability to upwardly flex her foot because her tibia and fibula were fusing together. That case appears to have involved significantly more serious injuries than those sustained by Meghan Hopkins
Nor are any of the other three cases cited by the court in Hopkins very relevant:
- Colon v. New York Eye Surgery Assoc. (1st Dept. 2010), previously analyzed by us, - $950,000 affirmed for a 49 year old woman with an avulsion fracture of her tibia without surgery but with RSD.
- Rydell v. Pan Am Equities (1st Dept. 1999) - $500,000 affirmed for a woman with a severely fractured ankle with ORIF, hardware removal and symptoms of the onset of arthritis. This seems at first glance quite relevant but it's more than 10 years old and there is no readily available information about the age of the plaintiff or the precise nature of her fracture.
- So v. Wing Tat Realty (1st Dept 1999) - $600,000 affirmed for a 25 year old woman with an ankle fracture, torn ligament, ORIF, hardware removal and traumatic arthritis. Again, this case is more than 10 years old and there's no information provided about the nature of plaintiff's fracture.
evaluation of trimalleolar fracture pain and suffering cases has come before our appellate courts with some frequency and we've discussed them before, for example, .
The award of $625,000 for Ms. Hopkins appears to be at the higher end of typical trimalleolar cases resolved on appeal in view of the following recent decisions
- Ryals v. New York City Tr. Auth. (1st Dept. 2010) - $400,000 affirmed for a 37 year old in a case sent back for a retrial on liability apportionment [previously discussed by us, here]
- Fishbane v. Chelsea Hall, LLC$550,000 reduced from $800,000 for a 69 year old man [previously discussed by us, here]
- Downes v. City of Mt. Vernon (2d Dept. 2009) - $288,000 affirmed for a 66 year old woman [previously discussed by us, here]
- The defense did not call any medical witness to controvert plaintiff's treating surgeon's trial testimony.
- There was evidence brought out by the defense on cross-examination that plaintiff had a pre-existing rheumatoid arthritis condition but her treating surgeon did not consider it significant because it involved the autoimmune system and Meghan's arthritis was post-traumatic.
$4,700,000 Affirmed as Reasonable for Pain and Suffering in Neck and Back Injury Slip and Fall Case
Posted on March 14, 2011 by John HochfelderOn September 21, 1998,at about 12:30 p.m., Shelton Stewart took the subway train from his job in Manhattan to his home in the Bronx. He got out at the Gun Hill Station and began walking down the subway stairwaysto the street.
Stewart slipped and fell on what he later claimed was pigeon excrement.
Pigeons are often seen on and around stairways at the city's subway stations:
Stewart, then 47 years old, was rushed to Jacobi Medical Center where he was diagnosed with a cervical contusion and admitted for one month of treatment. He ended up with several spinal surgeries and claimed permanent and total disability from the fall.
Stewart sued the city's transit authority charging it was negligent in allowing the stairway to remain slippery, especially so because this (the pigeon droppings) was a a recurring condition. The defendant vigorously denied liability and argued that plaintiff alone was responsible for his fall.
On December 19, 2007, after many years of contentious litigation, in Stewart v. New York City Transit Authority (Index # 13911/99; Supreme Court, Bronx County), a jury ruled that both the city and the plaintiff were negligent (the defendant 80%, plaintiff 20%).
The jury set Mr. Stewart's pain and suffering damages at$4,700,000 ($2,000,000 past - 10 years, $2,700,000 future - 20 years). That amount, along with loss of earnings and medical expense damages, was subject to a 20% reduction for plaintiff's comparative fault.
The transit authority appealed claiming that there was no way any liability at all should have been assessed against it and, alternatively, that the damage awards were unreasonably excessive and should be reduced.
Last week, in Stewart v. New York City Transit Authority (1st Dept. 2011), the appellate court affirmed the $4,700,000 assessment for pain and suffering damages.
The court decision sets forth the basics and here are the details of plaintiff's injuries:
- cervical spine compression fractures and contusions at C4-C5
- posterior cervical decompression and laminectomy at C3-C7
- thoracic spine compression fractures at T11-T12
- fusion surgery at C4-C5 with implantation of hardware, plates and screws
- post-operative Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection requiring debridement surgery
- lumbar spine herniated discs requiring lumbar laminectomies and posterior spinal fusion at L3-L5 with six large pedicle screws and plates and an iliac crest bone graft
Lumbar fusion surgery with pedicle screws and bone graft:
Even after all of the surgeries, extensive physical therapy and several epidural steroid injections and nerve blocks, Mr. Stewart remained in great pain and his back muscles were spastic. Ultimately, to pump anti-spasm medication on a continuous basis, his doctors prescribed and surgically implanted a synchronized baclofen pump:
At trial, plaintiff testified that he was still very much disabled from the accident:
- needs a walker to ambulate
- has spasms in his spine after sitting too long
- has difficulty sleeping, bathing and dressing himself
- was unable to return to his job (as a doorman) nor even an easier pizza deliveryman job that he tried
Plaintiff's medical expert testified that, due to the accident, Mr. Stewart is permanently and totally disabled.
As to damages, the defense focused upon a prior injury. In June of 1997 (a little more than a year before the accident), Mr. Stewart underwent surgery to remove two herniated cervical discs. Plaintiff admitted that before the subject accident he had some difficulty walking dues to weakness in his legs for which he occasionally used a leg brace and a cane until a few months before the fall.
Mr. Stewart had been working without any disability at the time of his fall and his medical expert opined that whatever his prior conditions were, the subway stairs fall was "the straw that broke the camel's back," caused the need for both spinal fusions and the baclofen pump and left him totally and permanently disabled.
- The defense expert, orthopedic surgeon Phillip Keats, M.D., admitted that he hadn't practiced medicine in seven years, made over $1,000,000 a year from litigation (almost exclusively working for defendants) and 25% of his court appearances were for the New York City Transit Authority.
- Several trial rulings went against the defendant including the limiting of evidence of plaintiff's prior injury to the damages part of the trial (not allowing it to be presented in the liability portion as a cause of the fall) and precluding undisclosed until trial witnesses (city employees who would have stated the stairway was clean and plaintiff said he fell because he missed a step).
- As a result of his doorman and porter jobs, Stewart claimed he'd become a bit of a self-taught expert on pigeon excrement, having seen and cleaned a considerable amount over the years. He was allowed to testify as to color and texture differences between newly deposited and older droppings and what the defendant should and could have done to rid the area of pigeons.
- Plaintiff's attorney was Bob Genis, of Sonin & Genis, well known among New York's trial lawyers as an expert on evidence law (which clearly was a factor in his superb achievements in this case).
Neck Injury and RSD from Electrical Shock - $2,500 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed on Appeal
Posted on March 8, 2011 by John HochfelderOn December 13, 1999, then 40 year old Terry Olmstead was employed as a shift manager by Pizza Hut of America, Inc.'s franchisee in Chittenango, New York (near Syracuse). While working in the kitchen near a metal work table, Ms. Olmstead received a severe electrical shock when she touched the table surface.
Treated at an urgent care center and a hospital that day and the next, Ms. Olmstead claimed that the shock caused all kinds of pain and disability, especially neck pain, and that as a result she was unable to work for the next month. She returned for three weeks but was unable to continue, left her position and then claimed permanent disability.
Here is a portion of her Bill of Particulars in the ensuing lawsuit, Olmstead v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc. (Supreme Court, Madison County; Index # 1930-02). Various injuries were set forth in the bill of particulars but by the time of trial the main injury claims were:
- cervical spinal cord and nerve root sprain, strain and pain
- complex regional pain syndrome (RSD)
Plaintiff's attorneys had difficulty identifying the party responsible for the allegedly defective electrical installation and delayed filing suit until December 13, 2002, one day before the statute of limitations was to expire. In 2006, the electrical contractor they sued obtained an appellate court dismissal of the suit against it.
Pizza Hut remained the only defendant but for the second time the case was delayed for several more years because Pizza Hut did not comply with court orders requiring it to disclose information and produce for deposition a witness who had knowledge of the electrical system and its installation.
Pizza Hut could not find anyone to testify as to whether the ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) was defective. Modern electrical systems require GFCIs in the form of either outlets or breakers in order to protect people from electrocution.
In April 2009, an appellate court upheld the trial judge's order granting plaintiff's motion to sanction Pizza Hut for its willful failure to comply with discovery demands. Thus, liability against Pizza Hut was established and the trial would address damages only.
Finally, in August 2009, the damages only trial was held. After extensive medical testimony, including three physicians for the plaintiff and two for the defendant, the jury found that Ms. Olmstead was entitled to a mere $2,500 for her pain and suffering (all past).
Plaintiff appealed, claiming that the damages award was grossly inadequate for a case involving complex regional pain syndrome (RSD, or reflex sympathetic dystrophy).
RSD is a chronic, painful and progressive neurological condition that affects the skin, muscles, bones and joints. Its pathophysiology is controversial and there are no widely accepted diagnostic tests for it. Nonetheless, when jurors are convinced that a plaintiff suffers greatly from causally connected RSD, very significant pain and suffering verdicts are rendered and upheld on appeal (for example: $3,100,000 - wrist, $3,500,000 - hip and $950,000 - ankle).
The appellate court, though, in Olmstead v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc. (3d Dept. 2011), upheld the jury's mere $2,500 pain and suffering verdict noting that:
- there was sharply conflicting medical evidence as to the plaintiff's injury and the cause of her current complaints
- plaintiff had significant preexisting injuries
- plaintiff was dishonest about her prior condition and her current limitations
There's more, a lot more, to what caused the jury to award such a small amount for pain and suffering and the appellate court to sustain it. Here are the missing details:
- In 1989, ten years before this incident, plaintiff sustained traumatic neck pain, headaches, face tingling and numbness and tingling in her arm when she was thrown into a swimming pool on her head. She was treated for these conditions by several doctors that year and the next.
- Plaintiff did not disclose details of the prior accident and treatment to her treating and testifying neurologist in this case (other than to tell him that her symptoms had not lasted very long).
- Six months before the current accident, plaintiff treated with a doctor for tingling on her face for two weeks along with neck pain and headaches.
- At trial, plaintiff was caught in a very serious lie with respect to her bowling activities - she testified that she used to bowl before this incident but that she last bowled in December 1999 because of her new injuries. In fact, she had been bowling regularly since 2003.
Inside Information:
- Plaintiff's main argument on appeal was that the trial judge should not have allowed the jury to consider the defense that plaintiff's preexisting injuries were the cause of any current or future complaints of pain or disability. Plaintiff contended that the preclusion order partially striking defendant's answer barred any defense related to preexisting injuries.The bulk of plaintiff's brief on appeal was devoted to this losing position.
- Plaintiff's main treating and testifying doctor was Pieter Kark. She treated with him from March 2000 through October 2003. By the time of trial, Dr. Kark admitted that he lost his license to practice medicine due to findings of professional misconducthere is the latest of three orders issued against Kark by the New York State Board for Professional Misconduct). Kark also admitted at the trial that he had not practiced since November 2004.
Record Pain and Suffering Award in Leg Amputation Case
Posted on February 20, 2011 by John HochfelderThis tragic amputation case was big and important at trial two years ago and now that an appeals court has weighed in, it's still big and important.
We wrote about Gloria Aguilar's case back in 2009, . Ms. Aguilar, then a 45 year old housekeeper, had been run over by a city bus in 2005 and as a result her left leg had to be amputated above the knee.
In April, 2009, a Manhattan jury awarded her$27,500,000, as follows:
- $16,000,000 for pain and suffering
- $9,500,000 for future medical expenses
- $2,000,000 for her husband's loss of consortium and services
Gloria Aguilar with her husband and two of their three children:
[Photo from New York Daily News, February 17, 2011]
As we predicted, the $27,500,000 award has been substantially reduced on appeal. Last week, in Aguilar v. New York City Transit Authority (1st Dept. 2011), the pain and suffering award was reduced to $10,000,000 ($5,000,000 past - 3.7 years, $5,000,000 future - 32.6 years).
Additionally, the medical expense award was reduced to $7,000,000 and Mr. Aguilar's claim was reduced to $1,500,000. The total award now stands at $18,500,000.
Even with the appellate court reduction, the $10,000,000 pain and suffering award represents the largest ever approved by an appellate court in New York for a leg amputation.
Some of the details of Ms. Aguilar's injuries are set forth in the appeals court decision. Here are some more:
- her first of 10 surgeries was a below-the-knee amputation of her left leg but, two days later, due to devascularization and necrosis, doctors sawed off further portions of her leg, converting the procedure to an above-the-knee amputation
- within the month, two more revisions of the amputation had to be performed, during each of which doctors sawed away more and more of Ms. Aguilar's left leg
- phantom pain from the severing of the sciatic nerve in her left leg
- her right leg sustained a degloving injury in the area of her heel requiring several irrigation and debridement procedures under general anesthesia and leaving her permanently unable to control her ankle or support her right leg, essentially wheelchair bound and unable to care for her own hygenic needs
- her post-traumatic stress disorder and severe depression, with recurrent nightmares and sleep disorders, were described in detail by an expert psychiatrist who testified that they are permanent and that she needs to continue in the regular care of a psychologist as she's been doing since her initial hospitalization
- extensive medication is needed for pain and depression, including more than a dozen pills a day and a pain patch on her foot
The defense contested liability at trial but in the appeal did not challenge the jury's finding that the bus driver was 100% at fault.
Conceding that Ms. Aguilar's injuries were horrific and life-changing, the defendant argued on appeal that $16,000,000 for pain and suffering was excessive and, in particular, urged that the jury should not have been permitted to make awards for "mental suffering, emotional and psychological injury" in addition to awards for physical pain and suffering.
It was indeed wrong for the trial judge to allow the jury to make separate awards for mental and physical pain and suffering. As the defense suggested, that may have resulted in a higher overall verdict than would have been reached had there properly been only one pain and suffering category.
Defense counsel, however, did not at trial object to the separate awards for mental and physical pain and suffering and, in any event, the appellate judges found that the error was not so egregious as to require a new damages trial. They simply reduced the combined pain and suffering awards by $6,000,000 and held that $10,000,000 is a reasonable sum for all of the (mental and physical) pain and suffering in this case.
There was very little comparable precedent discussed by the parties or cited by the court as to what would be a proper sum for pain and suffering. Bondi v. Bambrick (1st Dept. 2003) appears to be the most relevant. In that case, a $9,750,000 pain and suffering award ($2,250,000 past - 5 years, $7,500,000 future - 50 years) was upheld on appeal for a 35 year old woman in a motorcycle accident who sustained a traumatic below-the-knee amputation of her leg.
Ms. Bondi underwent nine surgical procedures, was in constant pain for which she required many drugs and a pain patch, had pervasive scarring and suffered similar psychological trauma. Ms. Aguilar's attorney, Ben B. Rubinowitz, argued that factoring in the rise in inflation since 2003, the $9,750,000 approved in the Bondi case represents a figure today well in excess of $10,000,000. The appellate judges apparently agreed.
Inside Information:
- Before trial, Ms. Aguilar was examined by experts retained by the defense in several specialties - orthopedic surgery, rehabilitation medicine, plastic and reconstructive surgery and neuropsychology; however, none of these experts were called to testify at trial.
- Mr. Aguilar's award for loss of consortium and services, even as reduced on appeal from $2,000,000 to $1,500,000, is a record award. In this regard, the appellate decision mentions only the fact that due to the accident he and his wife have been unable to engage in marital relations. Unmentioned were numerous other facts of their daily existence such as his lifting her in and out of the wheelchair, holding her while on the toilet, and wiping, cleaning and bathing her.
Massive Leg Injuries Result in $11,500,000 Jury Verdict for Pain and Suffering; Recovery Reduced to $4,000,000 after Appeal and Apportionment for Comparative Liability
Posted on February 17, 2011 by John HochfelderOn October 28, 2004, an 18 year old college student was crossing 70th Street at Eighth Avenue, in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn. On her way to the bank to perform an errand for her father, Walla Mohamed wound up under the front wheel of a city bus making a right turn and sustained very serious injuries.
Another pedestrian hit by a bus:
Walla sued claiming that she was in the crosswalk but the bus driver contended she was well outside the crosswalk – perhaps 20 feet beyond it – walking in between two illegally parked cars, so that he couldn’t spot her until it was too late.
On November 19, 2007, a Kings County jury rendered a verdict in Walla’s favor and found that her pain and suffering claim warranted an award of $11,500,000; ($4,000,000 past - 3 years, $7,500,000 future - 60 years). After a 20% reduction for comparative fault, plaintiff's net award stood at $9,200,000.
On a post-trial motion by the defense, the trial judge ruled that the damages verdict was excessive and he slashed it to $6,000,000 ($2,000,000 past, $4,000,000 future) at which point plaintiff's net pain and suffering award stood at $4,800,000.
The defendant appealed arguing that there should be a new trial because the trial judge erred in two ways:
- precluding the testimony of expert witnesses and accident reconstruction evidence and
- allowing evidence as to the transit authority’s internal rules barring passengers from crowding in the front of the bus (past a white line on the floor)
The defendant also argued that the trial judge's reduction of the future pain and suffering award did not go far enough.
In Mohamed v. New York City Transit Authority (2d Dept. 2011), the appellate judges have now rejected the defense arguments as to the evidence issues and, accordingly, they affirmed the jury’s finding that defendant was 80% at fault.
The appeals court also reduced the future damages verdict to $3,000,000, agreeing with the defense that the trial judge’s $3,500,000 reduction of the jury’s award for future pain and suffering was not enough.
Walla’s total pain and suffering recovery has thus been reduced to $4,000,000 - 80% of the $5,000,000 gross award ($2,000,000 past, $3,000,000 future).
Unfortunately, there was no mention in the appellate court decision as to the nature of the injuries other than a statement that Walla sustained “serious injuries.” We have uncovered the facts.
Injuries Details: When Walla was struck by the bus, it pushed or threw her several feet and one of its tires ran over her right leg. The injuries were indeed serious – a massive degloving injury of the full length of her right leg. This was a horrendous injury in which soft tissue, down to the bones, including neurovascular bundles, were literally torn away and peeled off from her upper groin down to her mid-calf.
Here are the other undisclosed injury facts:
- on the street, Walla saw the entire musculature of her upper thigh exposed and was in excruciating pain as she “could literally feel [her] skin getting ripped off, [her] fat, [her] muscle”
- when ambulance personnel arrived, they struggled to free her leg, which adhered to the surface of the roadway
- she was taken to Lutheran Medical Center where she remained for a month and underwentthree excruciatingly painful surgical debridements
- she was then sent to New York – Presbyterian Medical Center in Manhattan where she stayed an additional five weeks and underwent three more surgical procedures including debridements and the application of skin grafts, spending much of her time in the burn unit and tank
- she was discharged to home in a wheelchair, unable to walk and for six months thereafter underwent extensive and painful physical therapy
- she was confined to her home for nine months on both IV and oral narcotic pain medications
- she missed one year of college and at the time of trial was left with exquisite pain, horrific disfigurement, a limp and parasthesia to her entire right leg with 30% reduced range of motion and the need to use a cane to walk
Inside Information:
Continue Reading...who stated that his diagnosis of pathological bereavement was based on his examination of Ms. Ferreira, his review of all of the medical records and on Ms. Ferreira's eight years of carrying around and displaying two photographs of her deceased daughter taken after resuscitation efforts failed. He recommended ongoing psychiatric treatment.
Inside Information:
- Police Officer's Hand and Wrist Injury Result in $500,000 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed on Appeal
- Latest Trimalleolar Ankle Fracture Case - $625,000 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed
- $4,700,000 Affirmed as Reasonable for Pain and Suffering in Neck and Back Injury Slip and Fall Case
- Neck Injury and RSD from Electrical Shock - $2,500 Pain and Suffering Verdict Affirmed on Appeal
- Record Pain and Suffering Award in Leg Amputation Case
- Massive Leg Injuries Result in $11,500,000 Jury Verdict for Pain and Suffering; Recovery Reduced to $4,000,000 after Appeal and Apportionment for Comparative Liability
Search the Site
