What Lawyers Do

In keeping tabs of the goings-on in New York courts, it is worth mentioning that two appellate courts, in decisions issued within 4 days of one another, substantially reduced jury verdicts.

The jury system is fundamental to our system of justice. The jury that we are accustomed to, comprised of members of the community who together resolve legal disputes in the community, judge the guilt or innocence of the accused, and even award damages to parties, is a uniquely American institution that is largely considered to be a fair and reliable arbiter of disputes.

When appeals courts overturn damage awards from juries in personal injury actions, it is something to pay attention to. After all, the jury has seen and heard the evidence and testimony, putting it in a better position to use its common sense to put a financial value on abstract concepts such as pain and suffering. 

The first case involves a wrongful death award. Glaser v. County of Orange, 864 N.Y.S.2d 557 (2d Dept. 2008) (Sept. 30, 2008). The court reduced from $1 million to $350,000 a wrongful death award based on conscious pain and suffering, although the decedent was conscious for two to three minutes after the rear axle of a dump truck came loose and struck his windshield. The court said the original award “deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation.”

The second case involves employment discrimination.  In Matter of Iroquois Nursing Home, Inc. v. New York State Division of Human Rights, 864 N.Y.S.2d 632 (4th Dept. 2008) (ct. 3, 2008) reduced a jury verdict of $25,000 for compensatory damages for mental anguish and humiliation to $10,000 for a woman who was unlawfully refused a light duty work restriction as a reasonable compensation.  This award, said the court, was “excessive.” 

At What Lawyers Do, we — well, it’s just me writing, so instead let me boldly and grandly say “I” — think it is important to ask aloud the question of whether the original awards were that unreasonable that they needed to be reduced. Further, it is important to consider and debate the roles of the jury and the courts in setting damages and how they intersect. Just some food for thought.