One of the Oddest Tort Cases

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. RCinProv says:

    I guess you don’t read many tort cases. There is at least one this, uh, unusual, almost every month in the California Bar Journal’s summary of jury verdicts.

    Anyway, what’s so odd about a defective penile implant? Awful, yes.

    What’s odd, I think, is the reduction of damages. Was $750,000 out of line for what this man has suffered? I don’t think so. I wouldn’t take his condition for ten times the dough. And I doubt you would either. Would you?!

  2. Ted says:

    Of course, the correct result from a trial court that acted perfectly might be zero, since the penile implant in question was state of the art, there was res judicata from a previous federal case, and only the defendant who failed to perfect its appeal was held liable by the Rhode Island Supreme Court. See Overlawyered.

  3. RCinProv says:

    Leave it to Overlawyered to call an implant that causes ten years of agony “state of the art.” Yeah right.