Rhodes v. Raffeo
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-00855-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-15-2011 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Additur Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Myers, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-24-2009 Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court Judge: Lawrence P. Bourgeois, Jr. Disposition: A JURY VERDICT ON DAMAGES OF $5,000 FOR RHODES Case Number: A2402-08-307 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Krista Rhodes |
ROBERT H. TYLER
JENNY TYLER BAKER |
|
|
| Appellee: | Ronnie Raffeo | TRACE D. MCRANEY | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Additur |
| Summary of the Facts: | Krista Rhodes was a passenger in a vehicle that was rear-ended at a stop light by Ronnie Raffeo. Rhodes filed suit against Raffeo for compensatory damages for injuries that allegedly resulted from the collision. Liability was admitted, and the only issued submitted to the jury was the amount of compensation. The jury awarded Rhodes $5,000. She filed a motion for new trial or, in the alternative, for an additur, and the motion was denied. She appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The party seeking the additur bears the burden of proving his injuries, loss of income, and other damages. Since liability was admitted in this case, the only question for the jury was whether the chiropractor’s care and bill were part of the damages that were the result of the accident. Also, since the jury was not asked the basis of its award, it would be difficult or impossible to determine whether the chiropractor’s charges were awarded. The amount of jury verdict was only $36.99 above the expenses of the ambulance, the hospital emergency room, and the chiropractor; thus, Rhodes’s motion for a new trial or additur and appeal were based on the premise that she was only awarded damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $36.99. However, it is just as reasonable to infer that the jury did not believe that the chiropractor’s care was related to the accident and only awarded her the ambulance and emergency room bills, with the remainder of the award for pain and suffering. Either way, the Court is called to enter into speculation about the jury award which is not the function of an appellate court. As such, the circuit judge’s denial of the motion for an additur was not an abuse of discretion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
