Judge James d’Auguste
Pogoda sued for an upward modification of a jury’s verdict regarding past and future pain and suffering in this negligence action. She claimed the awards of $80,000 and $0, respectively, were insufficient and deviated from what was reasonable compensation for her injuries. Pogoda fell and injured her right hip and arm while walking on a jogging track of a cruise ship. To determine if an award deviated from what was reasonable compensation the court must consider the type of injury and degree of pain, as well as the period during which the alleged suffering occurred. It concluded the jury’s awards deviated materially from what was reasonable compensation finding, that contrary to defendants’ contentions, this motion could not be decided simply by deferring to the jury’s evaluation of differing opinions of medical experts. The court noted defense counsel was able to paint Pogoda as an unsympathetic witness, using her good recovery to downplay her extremely serious injuries. Defendants’ own expert admitted Pogoda required surgery to repair two fractures with two scars, months of physical therapy and reduced range of motion. Thus, Pogoda’s motion was granted and a new trial on damages was directed unless defendants stipulated to an award increase.
