DR. EDWARD SWAN, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
AVERY WISDOM, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 medical malpractice case, a jury found Dr. Swan 10% negligent for a complication from clavicle surgery that resulted in lung puncture. The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of a new trial, holding that mortality tables were improperly admitted without evidence of permanent injury, and ordered a new trial on both liability and damages.
Mortality tables are not admissible in the absence of evidence of permanent injury. Because the plaintiff failed to carry the burden of showing permanency, and because the extent to which future damages were inflated by the jury's consideration of life expectancy cannot be determined, a new trial on damages is appropriate. Moreover, because liability and damages are so interrelated, a new trial should be granted on both liability and damages.
[1] Mortality tables are inadmissible in evidence absent proof of permanent injury.
[2] A new trial on damages is indicated when future damages awards may have been improperly influenced by mortality tables, and remittitur is not appropriate.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Mortality tables are not admissible in evidence in the absence of evidence of permanent injury.”
Establishes the controlling legal principle that mortality tables require proof of permanent injury, which was absent here.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAvery Wisdom, age 29, dislocated his right clavicle playing football and was treated by Dr. Swan, who repositioned his arm and stabilized it with a pi…
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 Admissibility Of Mortality Tables cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
This is a medical malpractice action. Avery Wisdom was a twenty-nine-year-old man when he dislocated his right clavicle while playing football. He was treated by Dr. Swan, who repositioned Wisdom’s arm and stabilized it with a pin. The pin migrated and punctured the right lung. This caused blood and air to accumulate in the cavity between the lung and chest wall. Further surgery was required to drain the cavity.
At trial, the defense presented evidence that the pin fractured out of the bone while Wisdom was working on his truck without an arm immobilizer on his right arm, contrary to Dr. Swan’s instructions. The jury found Wisdom to be 90% negligent and Dr. Swan to be 10% negligent.
The standard jury instructions on personal injury damages found in Florida Standard Jury Instruction 6.2 were given. In accordance with Section 768.48, Florida Statutes (1977), the jury verdict form divided the possible damages to be awarded into: (1) past medicals, (2) future medicals, (3) lost income, (4) lost earning capacity, (5) past pain and suffering, and (6) future pain and suffering.1 Dr. Swan did not object to any of the jury instructions on damages or to any of the damages listed on the verdict form that went to the jury. He did object to the mortality tables, which went into evidence over his objection.
The jury’s awards of damages totaled $250,000.00. Dr. Swan moved for a new trial and for a remittitur. The trial court denied the motions and entered a judgment against Dr. Swan for $25,000.00 (10% of the total verdict) plus costs. Dr. Swan appeals the denial of his motions for new trial and remittitur. Wisdom moved to interview the jurors on the allegation that the jury got the liability percentages reversed. The trial court denied that motion. Wisdom cross-appeals. The cross-appeal is without merit and we affirm the denial of the motion to interview the jurors.
Mortality tables are not admissible in evidence in the absence of evidence of permanent injury. Seaboard Air Line R.R. Co. v. Ford, 92 So. 2d 160 (Fla.1957); Atlanta & St. Andrews Bay Ry. Co. v. Pittman, 130 Fla. 624, 178 So. 297 (1938). We have examined the evidence on future damages and although it may have sustained an award for a continuing injury, we do not think the plaintiff carried the burden in showing permanency. Since there is no way to ascertain the extent to which the future damages awards may have been increased by the jury’s consideration of the plaintiff’s life expectancy, a new trial on damages rather than a remittitur is indicated. See Seaboard Air Line R.R. Co. v. Ford, supra. However, we do not think that a new trial should be limited only to damages. The pleadings and evidence raise issues so interrelating liability and damages that we think justice would best be served by a new trial on both liability and damages. See Remsberg v. Mosley, 58 So. 2d 432 (Fla.1952); 1661 Corp. v. Snyder, 267 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972).
The denial of the motion for new trial is reversed and this cause is remanded to the trial court for a new trial on all issues.
REVERSED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., J., concurs.
SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, dissents without opinion.
. The validity of this statute has not been challenged on this appeal by either plaintiff or defendant. But see, Article I, Section 2 and Article V, Section 2(a), Florida Constitution.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sta-Rite Indus., Inc. v. Levey, 909 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…olsombach, 525 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Benoit, Inc., v. District. Bd. Of Trs. of St. Johns River Cmty. Coll. of Fla., 463 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Medina v. Variety Children’s Hosp., 438 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Swan v. Wisdom, 386 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). 2. In the light of the equivocal and uncertain testimony that Lorenzo would enjoy a normal life expectancy of more than forty years, and the almost entirely speculative testimony that, despite his vegetative state, he actually…
-
Benoit, Inc. v. Dist. Bd. OF Trs. OF ST. Johns River Cmty. Coll. OF Fla. & Giffen Roofing Co. of Jacksonville, 463 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…idence goes solely to the question of liability because “the pleadings [*1262] and evidence raise issues so interrelating liability and damages that we think justice would thus be served by a new trial on both liability and damages.” Swan v. Wisdom, 386 So. 2d 574, 576 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). MOTION FOR REHEARING GRANTED. COBB, C.J., and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur.…
-
Mann v. Allstate Ins. Co., 442 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Remsberg v. Mosley, 58 So. 2d 432 (Fla.1952); Medina v. Variety Children’s Hospital, 438 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Fairbanks, 400 So. 2d 550, 553 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Swan v. Wisdom, 386 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); The 1661 Corporation v. Snyder, 267 So. 2d 362, 363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Seaboard AIR Line R.R. Co. v. Ford, 92 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 1955)
- The 1661 Corp. v. Snyder, 267 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
- Remsberg v. Mosley, 58 So.2d 432 (Fla. 1952)
- Atlanta & Saint Andrews Bay Ry. Co. v. Pittman, 130 Fla. 624 (Fla. 1938)