AIRCRAFT SERVICE INTERN., INC. v. Jackson
Decision Date | 06 December 1995 |
Docket Number | No. 94-2302.,94-2302. |
Citation | 768 So.2d 1094 |
Parties | AIRCRAFT SERVICE INTERNATIONAL, INC., Appellant, v. Robert JACKSON, et al., Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickroot and Steven E. Stark, Miami, for appellant.
Kaplan and Freedman; Cooper & Wolfe and Sharon L. Wolfe and Maureen E. Lefebvre, Miami, for appellees.
Before NESBITT, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ.
Aircraft Service International, Inc. (Aircraft), appeals a final judgment and award entered pursuant to a jury verdict in a personal injury action in favor of Robert Jackson and his wife Verlinda, plaintiffs below. Aircraft also appeals the lower court's denial of its motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a remittitur. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a new trial solely as to the award of economic damages.
Jackson was driving a fuel truck at Miami International Airport which, while stopped at a stop sign, was struck from behind by a fuel truck owned by Aircraft and operated by one of its employees. Jackson filed a negligence action against Aircraft. At trial, there was evidence presented which indicated that Jackson's past medical bills totalled $143,000.00. Additionally, there was medical testimony regarding the treatment Jackson would require in the future. The total cost of this treatment was placed at $452,090.00.
Finally, plaintiffs expert testified as to Jackson's past lost earnings and his future loss of earning capacity. The former was calculated to be $55,960.00. With respect to the future loss, Jackson's expert supplied several different estimates, all reduced to present money value. First, Jackson's future loss was calculated assuming he never worked again at any job and would have retired at either age 62 or 65. These amounts were $255,649.00 and $280,980.00, respectively. Second, Jackson's future loss of earning capacity was calculated assuming, consistent with some of the evidence presented, that Jackson could return to some "light-duty work." At age 62 this number was $184,560.00 and at age 65 it was $202,933.00.
In closing argument, Jackson's counsel argued for the exact amounts presented above with respect to past lost earnings and past and future medical expenses. After briefly alluding to the alternatives, plaintiffs counsel chose the lowest of those figures available in arguing for $184,560.00 as damages for future loss of earning capacity. Finally, Jackson's counsel argued for a total of $1,720,000.00 in past and future non-economic damages.
The jury entered an award in Jackson's favor totalling $2,958,500.00.1 Of that amount, $1,850,000.00 was for past and future non-economic damages. The remaining $1,108,500 was awarded as follows: (1) $150,000 for past medical expenses; (2) $55,000 for past lost earnings; and (3) $903,500, which was the present money value of Jackson's future medical expenses and lost earning capacity.
Aircraft raises several points on appeal only one of which merits discussion. That is, whether the lower court abused its discretion in denying Aircraft's motion for a remittitur or new trial in the alternative. We first note that in ruling on this motion and, in particular, on whether the verdict was excessive, the lower court was obligated to look to and follow sections 768.043 and 768.74 of the Florida Statutes. Both sections have identical provisions which list criteria a court should look to when examining an award for excessiveness. The criteria are as follows:
§ 768.043(2), Fla.Stat. (1993).
In reviewing the trial judge's order denying Aircraft's motion, "[t]he test to be applied is the reasonableness of the trial judge's decision based on this court's examination of the record." Salazar v. Santos (Harry) & Co., 537 So.2d 1048, 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA) (citations omitted), review dismissed, 544 So.2d 200 (Fla.), and review denied, 545 So.2d 1367 (Fla.1989). Our examination of the record, in light of the factors listed above, leads us to conclude that the lower court abused its discretion in denying Aircraft's motion for remittitur or new trial as to damages.
There was uncontroverted evidence presented by Jackson that his past medical expenses totalled $143,000.00, yet the jury awarded him $150,000.00. Awards exceeding such a definite and ascertainable amount are readily vacated and remanded. E.g., K.C. v. A.P., 577 So.2d 669, 671 (Fla. 3d DCA),
review denied, 589 So.2d 289 (Fla.1991); Hollins v. Perry, 582 So.2d 786 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
More troubling, however, is the jury's award for Jackson's future economic damages....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
St. John v. Coisman
...Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U.S. 424, 121 S.Ct. 1678, 149 L.Ed.2d 674 (2001). 8. See Aircraft Service International Inc. v. Jackson, 768 So.2d 1094 (Fla 3d DCA 1995). 9. Nello L. Teer Co. v. Hollywood Golf Estates, Inc., 324 F.2d 669 (5th Cir.1963)(Florida); Florida Public Util......
-
Magical Cruise Co. v. Martins
...to the verdict. It also requires us to remand for a new trial on all damages included in Question 6. See Aircraft Serv. Int'l, Inc. v. Jackson , 768 So. 2d 1094, 1096 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (remanding for new trial on past and future economic damages when "[u]nfortunately, the verdict form prov......
-
Burger King Corp. v. Lastre-Torres
...and future medical expenses as those were excessive and not supported by the undisputed evidence. See Aircraft Serv. Int'l, Inc. v. Jackson, 768 So.2d 1094, 1096 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (stating that “[a]wards exceeding [a] definite and ascertainable amount are readily vacated and remanded”). Ac......
-
Gutierrez v. De Leon
...damages, and remand for a new trial on all past economic damages requested by Ms. Gutierrez. See Aircraft Serv. Int'l, Inc. v. Jackson, 768 So. 2d 1094, 1096-97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (reversing and remanding for a new trial on damages where the award of damages was not supported by the evidenc......