 Article
Feeds
|
Hassett's Objections: Ugh, Just What We Need - Higher Damage Awards by Lewis E. Hassett
Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP
Atlanta Office
| |
|
May 7, 2007
Previously published on Fall 2006
For a number of years, plaintiffs' attorneys have sought awards of "hedonic damages" separate from the traditional award of pain and suffering. Hedonic damages refers to "the detrimental alterations of a person's life or lifestyle or a person's inability to participate in the activities or pleasures of life that were formerly enjoyed." See McGee v. A C and S, Inc., Case No. 2005-CC-1036 (La., July 10, 2006). Through the McGee decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court became the latest jurisdiction to approve separate awards of hedonic damages. A minority of states agree with the Supreme Court of Louisiana. For example, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire authorizes a separate award for a "loss of enjoyment of life." Marcotte v. Timberlane/Hampstead Sch. Dist., 733 A2d 394, 399 (N.H. 1999). Similarly, Connecticut allows such damages. See Mather v. Griffin Hosp., 540 A2d 666, 678 (Conn. 1988). See also Boan v. Blackwell, 541 S.E.2d 242, 244 (S.C. 2001) (holding that damages for the loss of enjoyment of life is separate from damages for pain and suffering). Other jurisdictions allow hedonic damages to be awarded, or argued to the jury, as an element of pain and suffering. See Loth v. Truck-A-way Corp., 70 Cal. Rptr. 2d 571 (1998); Poyzer v. McGraw, 360 N.W.2d 748 (Iowa. 1985); Banks v. Sunrise Hospital, 102 P.3rd 52 Nev. 2004). Anderson v. Nebraska Dept. of Soc. Serv., 538 N.W.2d 732, 739 (Neb. 1995) (damages for a loss of enjoyment of life may be considered as an element of pain and suffering).
|
The views expressed in this article are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This article is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. |
|
|
RSS | Blogs | Site Map | Contact Us