Grayson v. Alexander

• Decision Date: 18 May 1977
• Citation: Grayson v. Alexander, 347 So.2d 108 (Ala. Civ. App. 1977)
• Parties: James E. GRAYSON v. Annie L. ALEXANDER. Civ. 1058.
• Court: Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

Page 108

347 So.2d 108

James E. GRAYSON v. Annie L. ALEXANDER.

Civ. 1058.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

May 18, 1977.

Rehearing Denied June 15, 1977.

Hubbard H. Harvey, Demopolis, for appellant.

Richard S. Manley, Demopolis, for appellee.

BRADLEY, Judge.

This case originated in the Circuit Court of Marengo County when James E. Grayson filed a complaint alleging he had suffered personal injuries as a result of an automobile collision with Annie L. Alexander. After trial before a jury, the circuit court granted Mr. Grayson's motion for a directed verdict. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Mr. Grayson for $1,500.00, and a judgment in that amount was rendered. Mr. Grayson then moved for a new trial alleging inadequacy of damages. He appeals from the trial court's denial of his new trial motion.

The sole issue on appeal is whether the award of $1,500.00 for injuries sustained in an automobile collision is so clearly wrong and unjust as to require a new trial.

There is no appeal from the directed verdict in favor of Mr. Grayson establishing Mrs. Alexander's liability for the collision. Thus, only those facts pertaining to Mr. Grayson's injury will be discussed.

The accident occurred on October 16, 1975. The only injury sustained by Mr. Grayson as a result of the collision was to his neck. After the accident he was treated by his personal physician, Dr. Earl Perret, Jr., who later referred Mr. Grayson to Dr. William A. Taylor, an orthopedic specialist. Mr. Grayson's total medical expenses were $290.00.

Dr. Perret, who is a general practitioner, testified that on the day following the accident he examined Mr. Grayson. An X ray of the neck revealed severe muscular spasm causing acute pain in the area and limiting neck movement. Dr. Perret initially prescribed medicine to relax the neck muscles and reduce pain. A week later Mr. Grayson again visited Dr. Perret; this time steroids and muscle relaxers were injected into the neck muscles and Dr. Perret prescribed a cervical collar to be worn as needed. After two other visits Dr. Perret referred Mr. Grayson to Dr. Taylor. However, Mr. Grayson also continued to see Dr. Perret and had not been discharged at the time of trial. Dr. Perret said that Mr. Grayson complained of pain in his neck at each visit. As a result of the injury Mr. Grayson has developed an arthritic condition in his neck.

Dr. Perret said Mr. Grayson's condition is permanent. It could possibly require surgery in the future; such surgery, if necessary, would cost approximately $2,000. Dr. Perret estimated that Mr. Grayson suffers a fifteen percent to twenty percent permanent partial disability to his body as a whole.

Dr. Taylor gave a medical description of Mr. Grayson's neck condition, including some nerve damage and arthritis. He prescribed an anti-inflammatory drug and a cervical traction device to be used for fifteen to twenty minutes twice a day for as long as needed. Dr. Taylor agreed that Mr. Grayson suffers a permanent partial disability but did not relate what percentage the disability has to the body as a whole. He did say that Mr. Grayson's condition had improved upon subsequent visits.

Mr. Grayson testified that at the time of trial he did not have full circular vision or full circular motion of his neck. He still suffered pain from time to time; although the pain had worsened in the past four months, he had not been back to see Dr. Perret. The injury has impaired his work very little but has caused him to curtail his hobby, which is landscaping.

Mr. Grayson contends that the $1,500.00 for damages awarded by the jury is inadequate compensation for his fifteen percent to twenty percent permanent partial disability. At trial he proved actual damages incurred for medical expenses of $290.00. His doctor said that in the event surgery is required it will cost between $1,500 and $2,000; neither Dr. Perret nor Dr. Taylor indicated future surgery is more than a mere possibility. Thus, discounting the speculative surgery, the jury awarded $1,210.00 above the special damages proved by Mr. Grayson.

Where damages awarded by a jury are challenged on grounds of inadequacy, an appellate court will reverse only where, after a consideration of all reasonable presumptions in favor of its correctness, the...