 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Duchamp v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.11/2/2005
nce pain from the condition in the future. Based on our review of the record, it is clear that no reasonable juror could have concluded that the plaintiff will incur $85,000 in expenses for future medical treatments but not incur any future pain and suffering. The plaintiff had been suffering from pain due to the accident for nearly three years at the time of the trial. A forensic economist testified that the plaintiff's life expectancy is approximately 24 years; if he were to suffer from similar pain during that time, requiring treatment through oral medication, therapy sessions, or injection treatments, he would certainly be entitled to an award for future pain and suffering.
After reviewing the record in this case, we do not find that reasonable minds could differ on the entitlement to damages for future pain and suffering. We therefore conclude that the district court did not err in granting the plaintiff's motion for JNOV and awarding the plaintiff $100,000.00 in damages for future pain and suffering. This assignment is without merit.
Future Medical Expenses Award
For their second assignment, the defendants alternatively argue that the "jury erred in finding that the plaintiff would not suffer future pain and suffering but providing an award for future medical expenses."
"An award of special damages is reviewed pursuant to the manifest error standard of review[.]" Thibeaux v. Trotter, 04-482, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 9/29/04), 883 So.2d 1128, 1131, writ denied, 04-2692 (La. 2/18/05), 896 So.2d 31. As we noted in our review above, at least three of the plaintiff's treating physicians testified that, more likely than not, the plaintiff would continue to experience chronic pain throughout his lifetime. The plaintiff provided extensive testimony offered by himself, his family and his doctors relating to the degree and type of pain he had suffered since the accident. While our review of the testimony indicates that the doctors suggested treatments that may help to alleviate the pain, they stated that these treatments would not eliminate it completely and he could continue to experience "flare-ups" indefinitely. Consequently, we find no clear error in the jury's decision to grant the plaintiff $85,000.00 for future medical costs. This assignment is without merit.
DECREE
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. All costs of this matter are assigned to the defendants, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Ernest Loftin, and the Succession of Ernest Loftin.
AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|