Articles Posted in Damages

Punitive damages in Tennessee are rarer than hen’s teeth. But that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be sought in appropriate cases – of course they should.

However, it is not enough to simply say: “what the defendant did was bad, real bad” and hope that you can carry the day. Punitive damage cases are aggressively defended and you need to have a good idea of the way defense counsel is going to approach the case.

Here is an article written by Dale E. Hausman of Washington, D.C. His firm represents insurers in insurance coverage matters. The article is titled “An Insurer’s Defense Against Punitive Damages Claims,” and although it is a little dated on the law it gives you an idea of what you will be facing at trial – and thereafter.

Here is a decision that reminds us about the law of arguing damages. The decision – from Florida but true in Tennessee – holds that it is reversible error to refer to assets of the defendant in trying to communicate to the jury how to determine damages for pain and suffering.

It is nice to get a big verdict. But is better to get one you can keep. And that means you should know and follow the law of argument.

The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that personal injury victims cannot receive punitive damages against a person who is dead.

The Court’s summary paragraph puts it this way: “The plaintiffs in this case were injured in an accident as passengers in a car driven by their father while he was intoxicated. After their father died of unrelated causes, the children brought this suit against his estate. We hold that Indiana law does not permit recovery of punitive damages from a decedent’s estate.”

In the text of the opinion the Court says this: “We think, however, there is little, if any, additional deterrence supplied by the prospect that one’s estate may be liable for punitive damages if one does not survive. Most tortfeasors in the case of an accident such as this presumably do not contemplate their own demise. If they consider punitive damages at all, they will deem themselves exposed to that possibility. To the extent the tortfeasor thinks at all about the consequences of his tort after he dies, he will recognize that he and his estate will have the obligation to provide full compensation to any victim. If we ever encounter a case where a tortfeasor seems to have considered his own death as an escape from punitive dam-ages incident to some intentional tort, we can address that issue at that time. For now, we are content to hold that the purposes of punitive damages are not served by recovering them from a decedent.”

Can a injured plaintiff who is back to work ask for damages for loss of future earning capacity?

Yes, rules the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, given the fact that there was evidence of ongoing physical problems and testimony by the plaintiff that he would probably not be working for as many years.

Each one of us deals with it almost every day – subrogation or reimbursement.

Many of those plans are covered by ERISA. This post by John Wood on our ERISA blog may be of assistance to you.