Tag Archives: Damages

Seat Belt Use Evidence Now Admissible In Texas.

19 Thursday Feb 2015

Posted by in Admissibility, Authentication, Damages, Discovery, Evidence, Motor Vehicle, Negligence, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Relevance, Torts, Wrongful Death

≈ Comments Off on Seat Belt Use Evidence Now Admissible In Texas.

Tags

, , , , , ,

TX: Evidence of Seat Belt Non-Use is Admissible to Apportion Responsibility, by Christopher J. Robinette, Torts Prof Blog (with hat tip to Jill Lens (Baylor)!)

http://tinyurl.com/kmbeph9

For years, evidence of seat belt use was prohibited at trial. The Texas Supreme Court changed that rule of law with this case. This ruling will have a major impact on this area of the law. -CCE

The Texas Supreme Court case, which was announced on Friday, is Nabors Wells Services, Ltd. v. Romero. The case (pdf) is here:  Download TX Sup Ct = Seat Belt Admiss  From the opinion:

We hold relevant evidence of use or nonuse of seat belts, and relevant evidence of a plaintiff’s pre-occurrence, injury-causing conduct generally, is admissible for the purpose of apportioning responsibility under our proportionate-responsibility statute, provided that the plaintiff’s conduct caused or was a cause of his damages.

Federal Judge Decides BP Blew It.

06 Saturday Sep 2014

Posted by in Damages, Environment Law, Litigation, Negligence, Punitive Damages

≈ Comments Off on Federal Judge Decides BP Blew It.

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Ruling On The 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Well Blowout, by Sabrina I. Pacifici, BeSpacific Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kh76r3q

BP has already said that it will immediately appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Among the errors BP asserts by Judge Barbier, it disagrees with the number of billions of gallons of oil that gushed into the Gulf of Mexico from the Deepwater Horizon rig. BP is trying to stop the bleeding. Every gallon of oil that spewed into the Gulf has a price tag for damages.

BP maintains a website with its version of the facts and its commitment to safety. Its argument was not sufficient to sway Judge Barbier.  Halliburton and Transocean were not hit as hard as some would have liked, but they were found to bear some of the responsibility for the disaster as well.

It will be interesting to see whether this ruling affects environmental cases, off-shore drilling, and oil and gas ventures in general in the future. -CCE

 New York Times: ‘A federal judge ruled on Thursday that BP was grossly negligent in the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil well blowout that killed 11 workers, spilled millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and soiled hundreds of miles of beaches. ‘BP’s conduct was reckless,’ United States District Court Judge Carl J. Barbier wrote in his sternly worded decision. Judge Barbier also ruled that Transocean, the owner of the rig, and Halliburton, the service company that cemented the well, were negligent in the accident. But the judge put most of the blame on BP, opening the way to fines of up to $18 billion under the Clean Water Act. In a 153-page, densely technical decision, Judge Barbier described how BP repeatedly ignored mounting warning signs that the well was unstable, making decisions that he says were ‘primarily driven by a desire to save time and money, rather than ensuring that the well was secure.’

Bifurcation Explained By An Eleventh Circuit Court Judge.

14 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by in 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Damages, Litigation

≈ Comments Off on Bifurcation Explained By An Eleventh Circuit Court Judge.

Tags

, , , ,

To B…or Not to B…: B…Means Bifurcation, by Judge David L. Tobin, The Florida Bar Journal, 2000 Volume LXXIV, No. 10.

http://tinyurl.com/p5vkklg

An excellent analysis and explanation. -CCE

From 1997 through May 2000, as judge in the 11th Circuit Court, I have bifurcated hundreds of cases in which the issues of liability and damages were involved. The most surprising statistic is that during this three and one-half years I have tried only one case in which the issue was damages! Do I have your attention?

Sometime in 1997, I was discussing calendar control and judicial efficiency with one of my colleagues, Judge Amy Donner, who said that she was bifurcating most of her cases. After our conversation, I examined the trials in my division for the year 1995 and found that of the 40 jury trials, eight of them were slip-and-fall cases. Of these eight, seven resulted in a verdict for the defendant. It occurred to me that if we tried only liability, between seven and 14 days of jury time would have been saved, enabling us to try several more cases. Accordingly, I then decided to screen our cases and began bifurcating slip-and-fall cases only. I hope that this article will assist judges and attorneys in selecting those cases in which bifurcation would benefit litigants and attorneys, as well as the court. . . .

Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

30 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Damages, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Litigation, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Settlement, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Show You’re Sorry, Even When You’re Not at Fault, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/ntvjm5r

[A]s we’ve noted before, letting jurors, judges, and opposing parties hear an apology can be effective when you are responsible, or are likely to be found responsible, for at least part of the damage at issue in the case. But what about when you’re not? Does that second kind of “sorry,” meaning “I recognize your loss, but without accepting responsibility for it” create a persuasive advantage as well?

According to some new research, yes, it does. . . .

Oh Happy Day for Pennsylvania Personal Injury Plaintiffs.

10 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by in Appellate Law, Case of First Impression, Damages, Evidence, Jury Persuasion, Litigation, Pennsylvania Superior Court, Personal Injury, State Appellate Courts, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Oh Happy Day for Pennsylvania Personal Injury Plaintiffs.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Appellate Case of First Impression – Future Medical Expenses Are To Be Included in Delay Damages Calculation, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK

http://www.torttalk.com/2014/02/appellate-case-of-first-impression.html

In a case of first impression, the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently ruled in Roth v. Ross and Erie Insurance Group, 977 MDA 2013, 2014 Pa. Super. 20 (Pa. Super. Feb. 7, 2014 Donohue, Ott, J.J., Platt, S.J.)(Opinion by Donohue, J.), that an award of future medical expenses in a personal injury case should be included in the calculation of delay damages due to the Plaintiff on a verdict. . . .

Court Splits on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.

27 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by in Damages, Health Law, Litigation, Massachusetts Supreme Court, Medical Malpractice, Torts, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Court Splits on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Splits On Extension of Tort of Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mr4matq

The recent December 22, 2011 split decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the long-anticipated Opinion in the case of Toney v. Chester County Hospital, 2011 WL 6413948 (Pa. Dec. 22, 2011)(Baer, Todd, and McCaffery, JJ. join in support of affirmance)(Castille, Saylor, Eakin, JJ. join in support of reversal)(Orie Melvin, J. not participating) serves to fuel an argument in favor of the extension of the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED).