| Venue: | NY Ct. App. |
| Facts: | The defendants malpractice leaves the plaintiff permanently comatose. Jury instructions include "loss of the enjoyment of life." |
| Posture: | Jury awards plaintiff $1M in pain and suffering, $3.5M for loss of enjoyment of life. Judge reduces these to $2M. Affirmed on appeal. |
| Issue: | Does an award of damages for loss of enjoyment of life serve any compensatory purpose when the victim has no awareness? Should loss of enjoyment be a separate category of damages from pain and suffering? |
| Holding: | No and no. Remanded for a new trial on damages. |
| Rule: | Cognitive awareness is a prerequisite for loss of enjoyment of life. Also, compensating these two categories separately just results in overcompensation. |
| Reasoning: | The purpose of damages is to compensate the victim, not to punish
the wrongdoer. Punitive damages are prohibited unless there
was wanton/intentional/etc. conduct.
It seems paradoxical to think that the worse a brain injury, the less the compensation, but that's the natural consequence of doing compensation this way. |
| Dicta: | The idea that money damages can compensate for injuries is a legal
fiction, and we cease being willing to engage in it when it
doesn't accomplish anything compensatory at all.
Dissent: The majority requires that the award have "meaning or utility to the injured person." That's not part of the law. The difference between compensatory and punitive damages is just that the latter exceed what is required to replace what the plaintiff lost. |