|
Printable version  |
 Top Ten Jury Verdicts of 2007
The total Top Ten awards for 2007 dropped 25 percent from 2006. This is 72 percent lower than in 2005. Last year's Top Ten includes several significant verdicts.
2007's #2 verdict was the largest negligent security award in the nation's history - $102.7 million to a man shot and paralyzed in the parking lot of a Miami strip club. The trial included an interesting battle over damages, with the defense arguing medical costs should be calculated based on care in Tunisia, where the plaintiff was from, while the plaintiff's attorneys argued he could not get adequate care in his native country.
The #3 verdict may well have longstanding implications, since it was the first large punitive damages award following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 127 S.Ct. 1057, to place new limits on punitives. The Los Angeles jury ordered DaimlerChrysler to pay $5.2 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitives to a man run over by his own truck when a faulty transmission caused it to slip from park to reverse.
Last year's Top Ten also included two pharmaceutical cases. For the third year in a row, Merck was held liable for its widely-used painkiller Vioxx. In a significant breakthrough for plaintiffs' lawyers, a New Jersey jury awarded $47.5 million to a man who had suffered a heart attack after using the medication for just two months. The plaintiff's first trial had ended in a defense verdict, but he was granted a retrial based on new evidence reported in the New England Journal of Medicine showing that short-term Vioxx use could increase cardiac risk.
In another pharmaceutical case, a Nevada jury awarded $134 million, including $99 million in punitive damages, to three women who developed cancer after using hormone replacement medication produced by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. The 5,000 pending cases are based largely on a 2002 study concluding that women who use Prempro for five years have a 26 percent greater risk of developing breast cancer, a 29 percent greater risk of suffering a heart attack, a 41 percent greater chance of having a stroke and a 113 percent greater chance of having blood clots.
In the #1 verdict of 2007, a New York jury awarded $109 million in a medical malpractice case where the plaintiff's lawyer asked for just $18 million. The 34-year-old plaintiff suffered massive memory loss from a seizure caused by a botched diagnosis. The verdict, which was comprised entirely of compensatory damages, included $67 million for the wife's past and present loss of services.
That verdict marked New York's return to the Top Ten list after a two-year hiatus, and propelled the state into a first place tie with Texas for the most Top Ten verdicts (22) since 1995. California trails in a close third with 20.
Meanwhile, Florida is coming on strong with four Top Ten verdicts last year - the only state with more than one - putting it in fourth place, with 17 Top Ten verdicts since 1995.
* Punitive damages have also experienced a dramatic decline. The total punitive damages among the Top Ten verdicts in 2007 dropped 36 percent from 2006 - and this occurred after the total punitive awards had dropped 83 percent from 2005 to 2006.
* Punitive damages made up only 33 percent of total Top Ten awards in 2007, compared to 66 percent over the last 11 years
For more detailed information about any case indicated below, contact Linda Sherman at LSSLC, 610-642-7755 or lss@lsshermanconsulting.com
#1 $109 million verdict for brain-injured man
A New York jury awarded a brain-injured man and his wife $109 million after his lawyer asked for just $18 million. Even though he believed the medical arguments were making an impact on the jury, Wilkens said the most critical testimony was from Karen Dockery, the injured man's wife.
#2 $102.7M in Florida negligent security case
A Tunisian cruise ship waiter who is paralyzed from the waist down was awarded $102.7 million by a Florida jury this fall in the largest negligent security verdict ever.
#3 $50M punitive award sidesteps High Court ruling
In the first major punitive damages case since the U.S. Supreme Court placed new limits on punitive damages in February 2006, a Los Angeles jury ordered DaimlerChrysler to pay $5.2 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitives to a man run over by his own truck.
#4 Private plane crash yields $54M verdict
In a trial where the defense seemed to fold its case after two unsuccessful witnesses, a flight instructor and his student won a $54.5 million verdict for injuries they suffered in a private airplane crash.
#5 Nursing home to pay $54 million for resident who bled to death
In the largest personal injury verdict in state history, a New Mexico jury awarded $54 million to the family of a woman who bled to death in her nursing home.
#6 Family of brain-injured boy wins $50M
A Florida jury awarded $50 million to the family of a boy who was severely brain-injured when a pickup truck driven by a drunk driver crashed into his family's car.
#7 Exploding water heater brings $50M
An Alabama jury awarded $50 million to the family of a man who was killed by an exploding water heater, which the plaintiffs' lawyer likened to a "time bomb."
#8 $47.5 million Vioxx verdict helps prompt global settlement
Nine months before Merck reached a global settlement with thousands of Vioxx plaintiffs, a New Jersey jury awarded one man $47.5 million for a heart attack caused by taking the painkiller drug for just two months.
#9 Nevada woman wins $47.6 million in hormone therapy case
Three Nevada women won the biggest verdict to date in the ongoing hormone replacement therapy litigation against Wyeth, convincing a jury that the company knew its drugs caused breast cancer but failed to warn patients about the risks.
#10 $45 million for crash that killed unborn child and 9-year-old girl
In a case where the defendant's insurance company rejected a settlement offer for $200,000, a Florida jury awarded $45 million for the auto accident death of a woman's 9-year-old daughter and unborn child.
|
|
|
 |
|
LSSLC, LLC provides the information in this newsletter for general guidance only, and does not constitute the provision of legal advice or professional consulting of any kind. The information provided herein should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional tax, accounting, legal, or other competent advisers. Before making any decision or taking any action, you should consult a professional adviser who has been provided with all pertinent facts relevant to your particular situation.
The information is provided "as is," with no assurance or guarantee of completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the information, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to warranties of performance, merchantability, and fitness for a particular purpose.
|
|
|
Full Newsletter
