 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Noel v. Wal-Mart Stores2/2/2005
AFFIRMED AS AMENDED.
Plaintiff, Margaret Noel, appeals the jury verdict awarding her damages from Defendant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., alleging inadequate jury award and failure of the jury to award future medical expenses and loss of future earning capacity. We affirm and amend only to increase the general damage award.
FACTS
On February 9, 2001, Margaret Noel and her husband, Joseph Noel, were shopping at the Wal-Mart store in Breaux Bridge, St. Martin Parish, Louisiana. While Mr. and Mrs. Noel were walking down the aisle in the paper products section, Mrs. Noel was struck on the head by a box of toilet tissue "flung" from a top shelf by a Wal-Mart employee, Joey Morvant, while restocking the shelves. The Noels brought suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Joey Morvant for damages. Mrs. Noel sought damages for her personal injuries and Mr. Noel sought consortium damages.
Prior to the jury trial, the parties stipulated that Defendant, Wal-Mart, was 100% liable for the incident, and Plaintiff, Joseph Noel, dismissed his loss of consortium claim.
The matter proceeded to trial with the jury awarding damages as follows: Past medical expenses $62,668.78 Future medical expenses $0.00 Past physical and mental pain and suffering $20,000.00 Future physical and mental pain and suffering $0.00 Loss of enjoyment of life $0.00 Loss of future earnings capacity $0.00
TOTAL $82,668.78 Plaintiff appeals.
ISSUES
The issues raised by Plaintiff in this appeal are (1) inadequacy of general damage award; (2) failure of the jury to award future medical expenses; and (3) failure of the jury to award loss of future earning capacity.
GENERAL DAMAGES
The jury awarded Mrs. Noel $20,000.00 for past physical and mental pain and suffering. The Plaintiff contends that she is entitled to an increase in the award of general damages.
In Andrus v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 95-0801, p. 8 (La. 3/22/96), 670 So.2d 1206, 1210, the supreme court stated:
In appellate review of general damage awards, the court must accord much discretion to the trial court judge or jury. The role of an appellate court in reviewing awards of general damages is not to decide what it considers to be an appropriate award, but rather to review the exercise of discretion by the trial court. Only if the reviewing court determines that the trial court has abused its "much discretion" may it refer to prior awards in similar cases and then only to determine the highest or lowest point of an award within that discretion.
Because discretion vested in the trial court is "great," and even vast, 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.
(Citations omitted.)
Mrs. Noel testified that shortly after the incident at Wal-Mart, she began experiencing pain so great she felt nauseous. Her husband then brought her to Southwest Medical Center of Louisiana Hospital where x-rays were taken and found to be normal. Mrs. Noel was released with a prescription for pain medication.
The following day, Mrs. Noel saw her family doctor, Dr. John Stroy. After examining Mrs. Noel, Dr. Stroy treated her with medication and physical therapy for at least eighteen visits. Thereafter,
Page 1 2 3 4 Louisiana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|