Maldonado v. Flannery

Summary

The dissent would have affirmed the Appellate Court's determination that the trial court abused its discretion by ordering additurs after the jury awarded economic damages but no noneconomic damages. It reasoned that the jury could reasonably credit the necessity and cost of medical treatment while rejecting the plaintiffs' proof of compensable pain and suffering, and that the majority improperly substituted its judgment for that of the jury. The dissent therefore would have left the jury's verdict undisturbed.