CARL J. THORNBURG AND BARBARA ANN THORNBURG, HUSBAND AND WIFE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF CARL DOUGLAS THORNBURG, A MINOR, APPELLANTS,
v.
HORACE PURSELL, PATRICIA PURSELL, JOSEPH PURSELL, MICHELLE WOOLEVER, FLAVIUS JOHNSON, GREGORY PURSELL, JONI PURSELL, TERRY PURSELL, GEORGE HILL, AND MARY HILL, D/B/A FIFTY'S FANTASY AND/OR FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER, AND THE CITY OF ARCADIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this negligence case involving injuries to an 11-year-old child who lost two permanent front teeth in a bicycle accident, the jury found liability but awarded damages equal only to past medical expenses ($575), excluding pain and suffering and future medical costs. The appellate court held that such an award is inadequate as a matter of law and reversed the trial court's denial of the motion for new trial on damages.
When a jury finds liability but awards only the amount of past medical expenses incurred, despite evidence of pain and suffering and uncontradicted testimony regarding future medical expenses, the award is inadequate as a matter of law, and the trial court errs in denying a motion for new trial on damages.
[1] A jury verdict awarding only the amount of past medical expenses, despite evidence of pain and suffering and uncontradicted testimony regarding future medical expenses, i…
[2] A new trial on the issue of damages is warranted when a jury awards only the precise amount of past medical expenses and makes no allowance for pain and suffering and fut…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Under these facts no reasonable jury would have returned a verdict for the actual medical expenses alone.”
Establishes the legal standard that awarding only past medical expenses without pain and suffering or future costs is per se inadequate.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarl Thornburg, age 11, was injured on November 28, 1979, when riding his bicycle on the premises of Fifty's Fantasy in Arcadia, Florida. Two of his p…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Future Medical Expenses cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
The Thornburgs sued appellees on the ground that their negligence resulted in injuries to Carl Thornburg, a minor. A jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs and assessed one-third of the negligence against the Pursells, one-third against the City of Arcadia, and the remaining one-third against the minor plaintiff. The Thornburgs sought a new trial on the ground that damages were inadequate. The trial court denied their motion and this appeal ensued.
Carl Thornburg, then age eleven, was injured on November 28, 1979, when he was riding his bicycle on the premises of Fifty’s Fantasy in the City of Arcadia. Two of the child’s permanent front teeth were knocked out. The evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury’s finding of liability and there was no credible evidence offered to suggest the child’s injuries were not the direct result of the accident. The dentist, who fitted Carl with a removable partial denture, charged $535; another dentist who examined him charged $40. In addition to Carl’s testimony of the pain and suffering he sustained as a result of the accident, the expert dental testimony also disclosed that Carl would eventually need an affixed bridge to replace the removable partial denture, which would cost approximately $1,500.
The jury was specifically instructed to consider as elements of damage: bodily injury; pain and suffering, past and future; and reasonable medical expenses, past and future. The jury awarded the plaintiffs $575, the precise amount of the past medical expenses, and made no allowance for pain and suffering and future medical expenses.
Under these facts no reasonable jury would have returned a verdict for the actual medical expenses alone. See Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1969). Where, as here, a jury finds liability and awards only the amount of the medical expenses incurred, despite evidence of pain and suffering and uncontradicted testimony as to the need for future medical expenses, the award is considered to be inadequate. Anderson v. Chirogianis, 384 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), aff'd., 401 So. 2d 1322 (Fla.1981). See also Hector v. Florida Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., 364 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Under these circumstances it was error for the trial court to deny plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial on the issue of damages.
We have examined and reject the cross-appeal filed by the City of Arcadia.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment as to liability but remand for a new trial on the issue of damages.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Dolphin Cruise Line, Inc. v. Stylianos Stassinopoulos, 731 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…la. 2d DCA 1994); Daigneault v. Gache, 624 So. 2d 818, 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Harrison v. Housing Resources Management, Inc., 588 So. 2d 64, 66-67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Smith v. Turner, 585 So. 2d 395, 396 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Thornburg v. Pursell, 446 So. 2d 713, 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); but see Allstate Indem. Co. v. Clark, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D2051, D2052, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 558733 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 4, [*711] 1998) (holding “a verdict which fails to award pain and suffering damages, despite awarding medica…
-
DeLONG v. The Wickes Co., 545 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…of wages. Gonzalez v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 463 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Such a verdict, in light of the evidence, is grossly inadequate as a matter of law and mandates the granting of a new trial as to damages. Thornburg v. Pursell, 446 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Shelly v. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co., 445 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Stevens v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 395 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). The fact that the trial court granted Natalie DeLong an additur in an apparent…
-
Thornburg v. Pursell, 476 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs moved for a new trial. The trial court denied the motion for new trial and granted the defendants’ motion to tax costs. The plaintiffs appealed, and we ordered a new trial on the issue of damages. Thornburg v. Pursell, 446 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). On remand, a second trial was held and a final judgment in the sum of $2000.00 was entered in favor of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs and the city both filed motions to tax costs. The trial court denied the city’s motion to tax…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Chirogianis v. Anderson, 401 So. 2d 1322 (Fla. 1981)
- Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1969)
- Anderson v. Chirogianis, 384 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Spriggs v. State, 364 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)