 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. City Baton Rouge4/30/1998
three days after DPW had commenced excavation on the Gages' property, he was notified by his sister, Louise, that DPW had destroyed materials he had been collecting. He confirmed an itemized list of the materials admitted into evidence and verified that the value of those items was $1,223.09. No evidence to the contrary was submitted to the trial court.
Leroy Williams testified that he had a small tin building with items he was saving for a house he was building in Zachary, Louisiana. According to his testimony, those items included baseboards, window casings, and shoe moldings. He stated that DPW workers burned up the building and the materials and estimated that the fair market value of the materials in 1984 was $350.00. There was no other evidence in the record regarding the value of this property.
Although the trial court has great discretion in estimating damages in a case like this, the primary objective is to restore the injured party in as near a fashion as possible to the state in existence at the time immediately preceding the injury . The usual tests do not always apply to achieve this result in the case of personal items. See Farr v. Johnson, 308 So.2d 884, 887 (La. App. 2d Cir.), writs not considered, 310 So.2d 854, 315 So.2d 143 (La. 1975).
Because there was no other evidence as to the values of Huston and Leroy Williams' personal property, we will amend their awards to conform to the evidence. Thus, the award of $500.00 to Huston Williams is increased to $1,223.09, and the award to Leroy Williams of $150.00 is increased to $350.00.
B. Mental Anguish
We turn now to an examination of the awards made by the trial court for mental anguish. In Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 623 So.2d 1257, 1261 (La. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1114, 114 S.Ct. 1059, 127 L.Ed.2d 379 (1994), the Louisiana Supreme Court in discussing awards of general damages noted:
he discretion vested in the trier of fact is "great," and even vast, so that an appellate court should rarely disturb an award of general damages. Reasonable persons frequently disagree about the measure of general damages in a particular case. It is only when the award is, in either direction, beyond that which a reasonable trier of fact could assess for the effects of the particular injury to the particular plaintiff under the particular circumstances that the appellate court should increase or reduce the award.
In reviewing an award of damages, an appellate court should not rely on a comparison of other awards in other cases to determine if a particular award is appropriate. A comparative analysis should be undertaken only after the appellate court has found an abuse of discretion. In Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 623 So.2d at 1260, (citing Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., 341 So.2d 332 (La. 1976)) the court stated: "Only after such a determination of an abuse of discretion is a resort to prior awards appropriate and then for the purpose of determining the highest or lowest point which is reasonably within that discretion."
The trial court awarded damages for mental anguish as follows.
Williams family plaintiffs:
Class I Ä Louise Jackson: $88,000.00, for mental anguish, inconvenience, and embarrassment;
Class II Ä Huston Williams, Willie Williams, Leroy Williams, Bernice (Williams) Christopher, Gloria (Williams) Taylor, and Alzetia (Williams) Davis: $28,000.00 each for mental anguish;
Gage family plaintiffs:
Class I Ä Beatrice (Gage) Harris and Irma (Gage) Carr: $75,000.00 each for mental anguish;
Ä Earline (Gage) Howard: $47,500.00;
Class II
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|