$35.3 million verdict may be
state record
Tuesday, October 08, 2002
BY HANNAH ALLAM
Pioneer Press
A Chaska man whose head was crushed by
machinery at work was awarded $35.3 million in what
is believed to be a record personal-injury verdict for
a state typically marked by conservative juries, attorneys
said Monday.
Gary Forde, 35, sued the California-based
Geo. M. Martin Co. after he suffered permanent brain
damage when his head became lodged in a box stacker
at work in Shakopee. A Hennepin County jury apparently
agreed with the plaintiff that Geo. M. Martin should
have equipped the machine with a safety device the company
has used in Europe for almost 10 years, said John Sheehy,
the Meshbesher & Spence attorney who represented
Forde.
"People read these verdicts and they
just think it's a jury gone wild," Sheehy said.
"But this man has many different constellations
of injuries and still kept his faith and a sense of
humor. He taught everyone in (the courtroom) a lesson
about life."
The stunning compensatory verdict was
delivered last week; the company entered a settlement
with Forde before the punitive phase of the product
liability trial began Monday. Because settlement terms
are confidential, the amount of money Forde is expected
to receive in addition to the $35.3 million was undisclosed.
A man who answered the phone at Geo. M.
Martin headquarters said the company had no comment.
Hennepin County District Judge Isabel Gomez, who presided
over the case, did not return phone messages Monday
afternoon.
"Unbelievable," said John Dornik,
president-elect of the Hennepin County Bar Association,
upon hearing of the award. "Anything in the seven
figures is a big deal here. In Minnesota, juries tend
to act like it's their own money. They're typically
conservative."
Attorneys were hard-pressed to recall
more than a handful of multimillion-dollar awards in
Minnesota. Some of the most-often cited included $16
million to a woman whose suicide attempt left her severely
brain damaged in 1991, $7.1 million to a man who was
left a quadriplegic after an epileptic seizure at a
hospital in 1992, and nearly $6 million to a woman who
lost part of her right leg after being hit by a school
bus in downtown St. Paul two years ago.
Although large awards are derided as "runaway
verdicts" in some cases, many in the legal profession
in Minnesota defended the figure Forde received as fair
compensation for a man who lost sight in one eye, hearing
in one ear and who suffered a host of injuries that
prevent him from walking, living alone or working.
"When you start counting up all the
medical costs and what it would be like to live like
that for the rest of your life, substantial verdicts
are justified," said David Weissbrodt, a law professor
at the University of Minnesota.
Weissbrodt said the company has three
options to challenge the jury's verdict: ask the judge
for a new trial, request that the judge reduce damages
in lieu of a new trial or file an appeal. While appeals
alleging excessive damages rarely succeed, Weissbrodt
said, that course of action is often used as a strategy
to delay payment and pressure the plaintiff to settle
for less money.
"While he's suffering, they can hold
this up for years and hope to get a settlement out of
the guy," Weissbrodt said.
Article originally appeared in the Pioneer
Press.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/4234078
|
