WOMAN LOSES LEG IN BUS ACCIDENT, TRANSIT AUTHORITY HIT FOR $27.5 MILLION FOR HER INJURY-BUT WE STILL DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' TORT REFORM

From: New York attorney Gary E. Rosenberg (Brooklyn personal injury and accident attorney and lawyer; serving Brooklyn Queens Bronx)

This story is about a month old, but still blawg-worthy.

A jury in Manhattan reached a verdict after trial of $27.5 million, in favor of a 45 year-old pedestrian, Gloria Aguilar. Gloria Aguilar's left leg was run over by a New York City bus in November, 2005. After several surgeries her left leg was completely amputated, all the way to her pelvis.

The Transit Authority's defense - rather an all or nothing proposition - was that she had been outside the crosswalk and walked in front of the bus.

Let me share some thoughts.

First, although I am a plaintiff's personal injury lawyer, representing people injured or hurt in accidents, I believe that it's hard to get hit by a motor vehicle while in the street unless you are not paying attention. This is undoubtedly the approach that the Transit Authority took in defending against Gloria Aguilar's lawsuit. In her case, the jury found that the bus driver was careless. However, it's hard to imagine that the jury was not swayed somewhat by her horrible injury. Also, Ms. Aguilar had a terrific, well-known New York City personal injury trial attorney.

Second, is this a case of the legal system run amuck? In a time of increasing budgets for buses and subways, with fare increases and service cuts, can we afford to let juries take a large chunk out of the taxpayers' pockets? (For that's where the money to pay this jury award comes from. There is no insurance for Transit Authority bus or subway accident cases.) Do we need "tort reform."

Third, "No, we don't need 'tort reform'." A verdict this large is unusual and unlikely to withstand scrutiny. And it is important to know that there is further scrutiny of jury verdicts. The jury does NOT have the last word. For example,

Fourth, the trial judge has the power to reduce an unreasonably high jury verdict. In this case, the judge declined to do so. Also,

Fifth, the jury verdict can also be reduced on appeal. In cases such as this, a higher court will compare the jury's award with awards for cases with similar injuries, and decide if the award "shocks the conscience." This is likely to happen here. Leg amputation cases rarely reach even into the eight figures (above Ten Million Dollars).

So what is a lost leg worth? That is for the jury and trial judge and appeals court to say. Just remember that our system does work, without any tort reformist notion like caps on pain and suffering, or taking away or limiting a citizen's right to trial by jury.