Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District · 2010 · Torts
TortsDamagesPersonal InjuryNew Trialadequacy of damagesnew trialabuse of discretionmedical causation
Facts
Plaintiff was rear-ended in a motor vehicle accident, hit her head on the steering wheel, and later received treatment for cervical pain. She continued treatment at the SIU-C student health center, eventually underwent testing that revealed a torn labrum in her left shoulder, and had shoulder surgery followed by physical therapy. At trial, medical bills totaling $28,804 were admitted, and plaintiff presented the only medical testimony. Both treating physicians testified, without contradiction, that the shoulder injury and related treatment were caused by the accident.
Issue
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial where the jury awarded only $5,000 in medical expenses despite uncontradicted and unimpeached medical testimony that plaintiff's shoulder injury and related medical bills were caused by the accident.
Rule
A trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial is reviewed for abuse of discretion by considering whether the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence and whether the complaining party received a fair trial. A damages award may be overturned when the jury clearly ignored an established element of damages, when the award bears no reasonable relationship to the loss suffered, or when the jury arbitrarily rejects testimony that is uncontradicted, unimpeached, not inherently improbable, and not contradicted by circumstances.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
In a damages-only negligence trial in Peoria, Maya Ortiz sought compensation after a delivery van struck her car. Her two treating physicians testified, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the crash caused a hip labral tear discovered months later and that the $31,200 in admitted medical bills for imaging, surgery, and therapy were reasonable and necessary; the defense offered no expert and relied only on cross-examination emphasizing the delay in hip-specific symptoms.
If the jury awards Maya $4,000 for medical expenses and $6,000 for pain and suffering, what is the strongest basis for reversal of the denial of her motion for a new trial?
Explanation. A damages award may be overturned when the jury clearly ignores an established element of damages or when the award bears no reasonable relationship to the proven loss. The jury may not arbitrarily disregard testimony that is uncontradicted, unimpeached, not contradicted by circumstances, and not inherently improbable. Here, the only medical testimony tied the hip injury and the admitted bills to the collision, and defense argument about delayed symptoms is not contradictory evidence. (Derived from Anderson v. Zamir (n.d.).)