You be the judge.
For the past two days, I served as a juror in a civil court case. Due to the highly subjective nature of the verdict, I am curious as to how you all would have ruled if you had been a member of the 12 person jury.
Here is the evidence submitted into the record:
In early August 2007, the plaintiff and the defendant were involved in an automobile accident. As the plaintiff was riding through the crosswalk on his bike, the defendant ran into him with her car. As a consequence, the plaintiff fell and suffered a small hairline fracture in his right shoulder-blade. The defendant admitted fully liability for the accident.
Although the plaintiff testified that the accident did not cause him substantial pain ("uncomfortable" was the most common adjective), he was however, unable to train or race in his competitive triathlon league - an activity in which he participates in his spare time - for approximately three weeks.
By the end of the third week, he reported to his doctor that he was "feeling better" and able to run and bike again. By the sixth week, he felt "normal" and was able to swim. Finally, at the end of September, he competed in his first triathlon since the incident. Unfortunately, he missed 2 or 3 races during his recovery and was effectively eliminated from competition due to its cumulative point based system. He had been training for the season since early January of that year.
In 2008, the plaintiff completed a full season and placed at the top of his age bracket. He reports no lingering pain due to the accident.
The plaintiff is suing the defendant for non-economic damages (not medical expenses or salary loss, just past inconvenience and suffering as a cause of the accident) in the amount of $60,000. The defendant denies the extent of the damages.
As a hypothetical juror, you only have one question to answer: for how much money should the defendant be held liable?
Here is the evidence submitted into the record:
In early August 2007, the plaintiff and the defendant were involved in an automobile accident. As the plaintiff was riding through the crosswalk on his bike, the defendant ran into him with her car. As a consequence, the plaintiff fell and suffered a small hairline fracture in his right shoulder-blade. The defendant admitted fully liability for the accident.
Although the plaintiff testified that the accident did not cause him substantial pain ("uncomfortable" was the most common adjective), he was however, unable to train or race in his competitive triathlon league - an activity in which he participates in his spare time - for approximately three weeks.
By the end of the third week, he reported to his doctor that he was "feeling better" and able to run and bike again. By the sixth week, he felt "normal" and was able to swim. Finally, at the end of September, he competed in his first triathlon since the incident. Unfortunately, he missed 2 or 3 races during his recovery and was effectively eliminated from competition due to its cumulative point based system. He had been training for the season since early January of that year.
In 2008, the plaintiff completed a full season and placed at the top of his age bracket. He reports no lingering pain due to the accident.
The plaintiff is suing the defendant for non-economic damages (not medical expenses or salary loss, just past inconvenience and suffering as a cause of the accident) in the amount of $60,000. The defendant denies the extent of the damages.
As a hypothetical juror, you only have one question to answer: for how much money should the defendant be held liable?
posted by d l wright at 3/18/2009 03:08:00 PM
10 Comments:
medical bills and missed work only. so the guy missed two weeks of recreation. how can you put a monetary value on that?
if he must be paid, I would say no more than $5,000. $2,000 would be my vote.
just to clarify: in this case, medical bills and missed work should be not be considered. this is only for non-economic damages.
Assuming that the reason medical bills and missed work aren't being considered is that they were covered already by the defendant or defendant's insurance, I am angry at the plaintiff for abusing a system that perpetuates this fucked up notion that a normal, happy life is one that is never inconvenienced.
I agree with Sam that the price of the inconvenience is a fraction of $60,000. Anything more than $5,000 I would have fought, a sum less than that I would have assented to just so we could all have gotten out of that hot box and gone home. My preference would be to give the man nothing.
How can you put a monetary value on pain and suffering? Where do we come up with punitive damages? How do you put a monetary value on a child or retired person's life?
People commonly receive financial awards for those things. There's a lot of precedent for this type of award. Although it wasn't physical pain, the guy did suffer. He was unable to participate in an activity that apparently means a lot to him. That's life? He would have been able to participate were it not for the defendant's negligence.
She hit him with her car while he was in a crosswalk. He lost something, and you guys are saying that thing doesn't have value?
I'm not saying he deserves $60,000 - but there is a claim here. I would also be fine with $2k though, the guy couldn't compete for a few races. Unless there is award money for finishing in first place or something two to five sounds reasonable to me.
For the "suffering" he experienced, $0!
I believe the plaintiff and his lawyer owe the court system money for wasting the time and energy of the legal system including all those on the jury. What a crock!
I'm with Sam. $5,000 tops.
I think this man just needs to be slapped. And maybe charged with abusing the court system. And wasting every ones time.
Logan, how old is this guy?
About 50.
Post a Comment
<< Home