One of the Oddest Tort Cases
posted by Daniel Solove
In what has to be one of the oddest tort cases I’ve ever heard of, the plaintiff won a $750,000 verdict, which was subsequently reduced to $400,000. To find out what his injury was, click here.
June 24, 2006 at 5:02 pm
Posted in: Tort Law
Print This Post
Responses (3)
RCinProv - June 24, 2006 at 6:44 pm
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?!
Ted - June 24, 2006 at 11:15 pm
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.
RCinProv - June 25, 2006 at 12:29 am
Leave it to Overlawyered to call an implant that causes ten years of agony “state of the art.” Yeah right.
Leave a Reply