 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sullivan v. Sanderson12/26/2002
the plaintiff's subjective complaints alone could be attributable to the accident in issue.
We can only conclude from what has been submitted to us that the trial judge erred when he found as a matter of fact that the record did not reflect "any objective findings" and that presumably all experts opined solely on the basis of the plaintiff's "subjective complaints." Because that explicit finding is critical to sustain a zero damage verdict and is flatly contradicted by the record as it was presented to us, the trial judge's decision to deny the Motion for a New Trial must be reversed and remanded. On remand, we request that the trial judge re-examine the record in light of Amalfitano and this Order and determine whether there is testimony in the record contradicting the plaintiff's expert testimony based upon objective findings of muscle spasm; and, if so, was it credible evidence upon which a reasonable juror could rely to reject plaintiff's proferred evidence of injury proximately caused by the accident.
Plaintiff's Motion for a New Trial and granting Defendant's Motion for Costs).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that this matter is REVERSED and REMANDED to the trial judge for action consistent with this Order. Jurisdiction is retained.
Page 1 2 Delaware Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|