Greenbaum v. Savoy
2000 WL 4770, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 50, 751 So. 2d 663 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An award for future loss of earning capacity is sufficiently supported by evidence demonstrating a plaintiff's pre-injury earnings, a permanent injury that medically restricts them from performing their previous job, and a quantifiable decrease in post-injury income.
Facts:
- Prior to an automobile accident, the plaintiff worked as a restaurant server, earning approximately $360 per week.
- The plaintiff sustained a neck injury in the accident, which was diagnosed as a permanent injury with a bulging disc.
- As a result of the injury, the plaintiff's doctor instructed her not to lift anything weighing over twenty-five pounds.
- The plaintiff's former restaurant employer testified that servers were required to carry trays weighing up to forty-five pounds and that he would not re-hire her without medical clearance to perform such work.
- The plaintiff, who did not graduate from high school, had worked primarily in restaurants throughout her adult life.
- After the accident, she was unable to return to her server job and took lower-paying positions, eventually earning $6.50 per hour.
- At the time of the trial, the plaintiff was thirty-three years old.
Procedural Posture:
- The plaintiff sued the defendant in a trial court for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial, where the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
- The verdict included an award of $40,000 for future loss of earning capacity.
- The defendant filed a post-trial motion for a new trial or remittitur, challenging the award for future lost earning capacity as excessive and unsupported by the evidence.
- The trial court granted the motion in part by striking the $40,000 award for future lost earning capacity from the verdict.
- The plaintiff, as appellant, appealed the trial court's order striking the damages award to the intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does evidence of a permanent injury, a specific work-related physical limitation, a resulting inability to perform a prior job, and a subsequent, documented decrease in wages constitute sufficient evidence to support a jury award for future loss of earning capacity?
Opinions:
Majority - Klein, J.
Yes. Evidence of a permanent injury that prevents a plaintiff from returning to their prior employment, coupled with a quantifiable reduction in wages, is sufficient to support a jury's award for future loss of earning capacity. The court found there was ample evidence to support the jury's finding. The plaintiff presented clear evidence that she earned $360 per week as a server, that her injury prevented her from continuing in that profession because of its physical demands, and that her subsequent jobs paid significantly less, around $280 per week. This documented drop in income, for a thirty-three-year-old plaintiff, was more than enough to justify the $40,000 award. The court concluded that striking the award was improper and that even granting a new trial on the grounds of excessiveness would have been an abuse of discretion.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the evidentiary standard required to prove a claim for lost future earning capacity. It establishes that a plaintiff may not need to present complex vocational expert testimony to succeed. Instead, clear and direct evidence of pre-injury income, a specific medical limitation preventing a return to that work, and post-injury income at a demonstrably lower rate is sufficient for a jury to make a reasonable award. This precedent reinforces the jury's role in assessing damages and limits a trial court's authority to substitute its own judgment when the verdict is supported by such concrete evidence.
Unlock the full brief for Greenbaum v. Savoy