 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Woodland v. Thornton8/25/2005
ed her condition as permanent, and predicted that she will probably always have pain in her neck. Because she was not in pain before the accident, but has continued to suffer pain since the accident occurred, Woodland contends, this is evidence that her problems more likely than not were caused by the accident.
In a negligence claim, the plaintiff has the burden of proving a causal connection between the negligence and the injury suffered. See Begley v. State, 162 S.W.3d 535, 543 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). Though causation must not be proven with absolute certainty, it cannot be based on mere conjecture or speculation. See Porter v. Green, 745 S.W.2d 874, 877 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1987). "Where a physician testifies concerning the physical condition, his opinion must be reasonably certain both as to the cause of the physical condition and its future effects." Id. The parties do not dispute that Dr. Burnett's testimony supports Woodland's assertion that she suffers from a permanent impairment and that she will likely have neck pain in the future. Dr. Burnett's testimony, however, simply does not support a finding that any permanent impairment or future pain was caused by the accident. Dr. Burnett candidly admitted that he "can't say for sure" that the chronic nature of Woodland's neck pain was caused by the accident, in light of her pre-existing degenerative condition. Dr. Lindermuth went further in stating his opinion that Woodland would have no permanent impairment, which tends to show that the accident did not cause any future pain or permanent impairment. There is no other expert testimony to support this element of damages. Therefore, the jury's award of $8,000 for future pain and suffering, future loss of enjoyment of life, and permanent injury must be vacated.
In sum, we conclude that the trial court erred in failing to remit the jury's damage award for past medical care or services, miscellaneous expenses, and property damage, and in failing to vacate the jury's award for future medical care or services, future pain and suffering, future loss of enjoyment of life and permanent injury . The remaining portions of the jury verdict were not challenged on appeal and, therefore, are affirmed.
The decision of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, as set forth above, and the cause is remanded for the trial court to enter a judgment modifying the jury verdict to conform to the evidence at trial, consistent with this Opinion. Costs on appeal are to be taxed to the Appellee Bernice Walton Woodland, for which execution may issue, if necessary.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|