Judge doesn?t reduce $7.2M award against River Park
|
Stanley?s decision means the $7.2 million in damages a jury awarded to the Barkes family in January will be upheld.
Stanley heard final arguments from attorneys for both sides on Friday and yesterday he upheld the jury?s verdict on all the issues presented.
Barkes had been to the emergency room at River Park complaining of common heart attack symptoms. However he was released from the emergency room and died at home about a half hour later.
David Randolph Smith, attorney for the Barkes family, said he feels Stanley made the right decisions considering the facts of the case.
?This was a long case, lasting for many years,? Smith said. ?There were many rulings, both by Judge Haston and Judge Stanley, and I think the court was correct that there was no error committed in the case.?
Though River Park has the option to continue its appeals, Smith says he feels Stanley?s decision was fair and should bring an end to the suit.
?We hope that we are able to conclude the litigation,? Smith said. ?The judge approved the voice of the community and he should be commended. He worked very hard on this case.?
Specifically, three motions filed by the defendant, HCA, and one motion from the plaintiff, were addressed. The defendant?s filings included a motion to alter the judgment, a motion for a new trial, and a motion for remittitur, essentially a request for a reduction of the amount of the monetary award.
The plaintiff?s motion was for discretionary costs, which would have reimbursed the plaintiff for some of the legal costs incurred in reacting to the defendant?s motion for retrial.
Stanley?s decisions on each of those motions are as follows:
? Defendant?s Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment
After having reviewed the record in this case, this court finds that sufficient material evidence exists to support the verdict rendered by the jury, and that no errors exist that would require the judgment to be altered or amended. The defendant?s motion to alter or amend the jury?s verdict is, therefore, denied.
? Defendant?s Motion for a New Trial
The court, in its role as 13th juror, has considered all the evidence presented at trial, the arguments of counsel, the testimony of witnesses, the exhibits introduced into evidence, and the entire record as a whole. After independently weighting the evidence, this court finds the weight of the evidence preponderates in favor of the court?s finding that the judgment in this case is correct.
? Defendant?s Motion for Remittitur
The court has also given great consideration to the request for remittitur by the defendants ? an issue which obviously has no clear line differentiating between a reasonable amount and an unreasonable amount to adequately compensate for the loss in a wrongful death action. The court has reviewed statutory law and the verdicts in other cases of this type as provided by counsel, along with all the proof in this case dealing with losses brought about by the death of the decedent, including the proof regarding loss of consortium and medical expenses. This court finds that the jury?s award was not so excessive as to indicate it was formed with sympathy and passion. This court further finds that the award was not beyond the range of reasonableness for the loss of the life of the decedent. Therefore, the court finds that a suggestion of remittitur is not warranted and their motion to this effect is hereby denied.
? Plaintiff?s Motion for Discretionary Costs
Finally, the court has considered the plaintiff?s motion for discretionary costs in this case and hereby declines to award any discretionary costs to the plaintiff in this matter. The plaintiff?s motion is, therefore, denied.
Smith said the motion to reduce the amount of the award required more thought, since the jury?s decision on that issue was based on more subjective information. In addition, the fact separate awards were designated for Barkes? wife and each of his children tended to make the total award, the largest ever in Warren County, seem inflated.
?The more difficult question was putting a value on a man?s life,? Smith said. ?Because Mr. Barkes had five children and a wife, that makes it seem like the verdict is really larger than it is.?