 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Gleason v. Kueker8/15/2001
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Stephen C. Clarke, Judge.
Gary Kueker appeals following a jury verdict awarding damages to the plaintiffs.
AFFIRMED.
A jury awarded Mary Gleason and her husband damages in their personal injury action against Gary Kueker. The damages included an award for future medical expenses. Kueker contends the jury did not reduce this award to present value. We disagree and affirm.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
Kueker rear-ended Gleason's car at a stoplight. Gleason sued for injuries sustained in the accident and her husband David sued for loss of consortium.
Dr. Jennifer Rasmussen, a chiropractor who treated Mary Gleason for neck, shoulder, and back pain testified at trial. She opined that the accident resulted in a thirty-two percent whole body impairment rating.
She also opined Gleason's condition would worsen and she would eventually need surgery. Dr. Rasmussen stated she released Gleason from her care after fourteen visits because she was unable to do anything for her. Gleason also called Michael Kaus, a physical therapist who treated her. He opined Gleason needed ongoing physical therapy.
The plaintiffs did not call an economic expert to testify about damages. Instead, Gleason herself estimated the damages she believed she had sustained. She testified her post-accident medical expenses totaled $17,607.59. Based on this figure, and a life expectancy of thirty years , she approximated her future health costs at $130,000. Gleason stated she arrived at this approximation as follows:
"Past health care costs divided by four years times 30 years equals $132,00.57 or last month health costs times 12 times 30 years and that comes to $131,400."
The jury returned a verdict of $299,324.84 for Mary Gleason, $126,400 of which was allocated to future medical expenses. Kueker moved for a new trial and remittitur. The district court denied both motions. This appeal followed. On appeal, Kueker challenges only the future medical expenses award.
II. Scope of Review
Kueker challenges the district court's denial of his motion for new trial as it relates to the jury's award of future medical expenses. Our scope of review on this issue is for abuse of discretion. See Condon Auto Sales & Service, Inc. v. Crick, 604 N.W.2d 587, 594 (Iowa 1999).
A denial of remittitur is generally also reviewed for abuse of discretion. Id. at 595; Kuta v. Newberg, 600 N.W.2d 280, 285 (Iowa 1999). However, where the question is whether the jury followed the law, we believe our review is on error. See Schnebly v. Baker, 217 N.W.2d 708, 724 (Iowa 1974) (noting damage award may be set aside if wrong measure is applied); Schwennen v. Abell, 471 N.W.2d 880, 887 (Iowa 1991) (jury presumed to follow instructions).
III. Present Value of Future Medical Expenses
Iowa law requires an award for future damages in a personal injury action to be reduced to present value. See Iowa Code ยง 624.18. The jury received an instruction consistent with this law. The key question is whether the jury followed the instruction. Kueker contends it did not. He points out that the jury's award of $126,400 for future medical expenses is roughly equal to Gleason's past yearly medical expenses multiplied by her life expectancy, less the costs of the chiropractic care that was no longer needed. The Gleasons respond that Kueker's attempt to parse the future medical expense award amounts to speculation. Both parties raise cogent arguments. To resolve their competing claims, we find it necessary to examine the theory and
Page 1 2 3 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|