Defendant Not Responsible for Victim’s Pain and Suffering, Says Jury

Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

Following a car accident, plaintiff personal injury victim filed a negligence action against defendant driver. The driver filed a defense of comparative negligence. A jury rendered a verdict for the victim but found him to have been 45 percent comparatively negligent; it awarded economic damages of $ 3,000 and no noneconomic damages. The victim filed motions for an additur and a new trial. The driver filed written objections.

The victim claimed that the verdict was inadequate and that the issue of comparative negligence was improperly submitted to the jury. The court held that the jury reasonably could have concluded that the victim's economic damages were less than he claimed. However, the jury could not reasonably have found the driver to be responsible initially for the victim's economic damages resulting from medical treatment rendered in 1999 for his pain and discomfort, but not liable for any noneconomic damages. The evidence established that the collision caused the victim to suffer physical pain and discomfort. His medical visits for which the jury awarded economic damages were all to treat his complaints that year of pain and discomfort. For those medical expenses to be properly attributable to the driver, as the jury found, then the driver must have caused the pain that prompted the victim to incur those expenses; otherwise, the jury could not have found defendant liable for those expenses. Finally, the evidence was sufficient for a finding of comparative negligence as the victim conceded that his primary attention was on another vehicle.

The victim's motion to set aside the verdict was denied. However, an additur was granted for non-economic damages, subject to reduction because of the victim's comparative negligence. If the additur was not accepted by both parties, the jury's verdict would then be set aside and a new trial ordered.

At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained.

Source: Stone v. Viola, 2004 Conn. Super. LEXIS 527, 2004 WL 574875 (Conn. Super. Ct. Mar. 8, 2004)