Gen. Emps. Ins. Co. v. Isaacs

• Decision Date: 07 December 2016
• Docket Number: No. 4D15–2263,4D15–2263
• Parties: GENERAL EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY a/k/a GEICO, Appellant, v. Lauri ISAACS, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

206 So.3d 62

GENERAL EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY a/k/a GEICO, Appellant,

v.Lauri ISAACS, Appellee.

No. 4D15–2263

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[December 7, 2016]

Sharon C. Degnan of Kubicki Draper, Orlando, for appellant.

Kenneth D. Cooper, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Klingensmith, J.

Lauri Isaacs suffered injuries due to a car accident. She filed suit against GEICO, her uninsured motorist carrier, seeking compensation for past and future medical expenses as well as pain and suffering. At trial, Isaacs was awarded a total of $750,000 for medical expenses and pain and suffering. After a reduction of $60,000 in collateral source setoffs, judgment was entered for $690,000. This amount included an award for future medical expenses of $360,000. GEICO moved post-trial for remittitur and for a new trial, arguing the jury's award for future medical expenses was excessive and belied by the manifest weight of the evidence. Based on our review of the record, the motion for remittitur as to the award for future medical expenses should have been granted.

"The standard of review for an order denying a motion for new trial or denying a remittitur is abuse of discretion." Whitney v. Milien , 125 So.3d 817, 819 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). While most personal injury verdicts involve an element of speculation subject to jury discretion, a court may review their discretion and reduce the award if "shown to be clearly arbitrary." Arnold v. Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co. , 174 So.3d 1082, 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (quoting Sproule v. Nelson , 81 So.2d 478, 481 (Fla. 1955) ). In that regard, "[a] court cannot allow a jury to award a greater amount of damages than what is reasonably supported by the evidence at trial." Festival Fun Parks, LLC v. Bellamy , 123 So.3d 684, 685–86 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (quoting Truelove v. Blount , 954 So.2d 1284, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) ).

"[O]nly medical expenses that are reasonably certain to be incurred in the future are recoverable." Vazquez v. Martinez , 175 So.3d 372, 374 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) ; accord GEICO Indem. Co. v. DeGrandchamp , 102 So.3d 685, 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). Further, "[t]here must also be an evidentiary basis upon which the jury can, with reasonable certainty, determine the amount of those expenses." Vazquez , 175 So.3d at 374 ; see also GEICO , 102 So.3d at 686 (holding that "[w]hile DeGrandechamp [sic] established that she was reasonably certain to incur at least some medical expenses in the future, we can find no evidentiary basis to support the amount of the jury's award in this case"). Testimony or evidence that certain treatments might possibly be obtained in the future cannot merit an award of future medical expenses. Vazquez , 175 So.3d at 374 (citing Fasani v. Kowalski , 43 So.3d 805, 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) ; Truelove , 954 So.2d at 1288 ).

At trial, one of Isaacs' treating physicians opined that she would incur up to $2,000 in future medical expenses per year, and also recommended that she undergo shoulder surgery that he estimated would cost...