 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Russom v. McClore5/10/2000
This appeal arises from an action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, Mr. Russom, and a loss of consortium claim filed by plaintiff,Mrs. Russom. Mr. Russom and Mr. McClore were involved in a traffic accident caused by defendant McClore. The Russoms filed suit to recover damages in the Shelby County Circuit Court. The only issue at trial was the amount of damages to be awarded to the Russoms. The jury returned a verdict for Mr. Russom in the amount of eight thousand dollars. The jury failed to award Mrs. Russom any damages for her loss of consortium claim. The Russoms subsequently filed a motion for new trial, or in the alternative, a Suggestion of Additur that was denied by the trial court. The Russoms have appealed.
Tenn.R.App.P. 3; Appeal as of right; Judgment of the Circuit Court is Affirmed.
Highers, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Crawford, P.J., W.S., and Lillard, J., joined.
OPINION
On appeal, the Russoms assert that the trial court erred in denying their motion for new trial. Based on the following, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Facts and Procedural History
Mr. Russom and Mr. McClore were involved in an auto collision in Memphis, Tennessee on May 15, 1996. The accident occurred when Mr. McClore ran a red light and broadsided Mr. Russom's truck while both parties were attempting to cross an intersection. On January 24, 1997, Mr. Russom filed suit to recover damages for personal injury and loss of income. In addition, Mrs. Russom sought recovery for loss of consortium caused by her husband's injuries. Prior to trial, Mr. McClore conceded liability in causing the accident. As a result, the only trial issue was the amount of damages, if any, to be awarded to the Russoms.
A jury trial on the matter was held in December 1998. At trial, Mr. Russom testified regarding a back injury that resulted from the accident. According to Russom, he was in persistent pain and sought treatment from two doctors in the period following the accident. Russom testified that he had not suffered from back pain prior to the accident and was in good health. In addition, the deposition testimony of Russom's doctor, Dr. Friedman, was presented. This testimony indicated that Russom suffered from "chronic muscle-tendon-ligament strain" that probably resulted from the accident. According to Friedman, the condition would gradually improve. Russom also offered medical bills detailing his treatment. These bills totaled around seventy three hundred dollars.
Russom offered some evidence indicating a decreased earning capacity from the time of the accident until December 1996. However, during this period, Russom continued to work in a "light duty status" at his job as an auto body repair person. In summary, Russom earned twenty-one thousand dollars in 1994 and twenty-five thousand dollars in 1995, the years prior to the accident. In 1996, the year the accident actually occurred, Russom earned twenty-three thousand dollars. At the time of trial, Mr. Russom had earned approximately thirty-one thousand dollars in 1998. According to Russom, his increased income was because he had learned to "work smarter."
Mrs. Russom testified about her husband's condition following the accident and the effect this had on the Russom household. According to Mrs. Russom, her husband did not sleep well and was often in pain. In addition, she testified that Mr. Russom was no longer able to help her with household chores.
The jury returned a verdict of eight thousand dollars for Mr. Russom, allocating nothing to Mrs. Russom for her loss of consortium claim. Seeking a greater recovery,
Page 1 2 3 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|