85 A.3d 618
R.I.2014Background
- Rear-end collision on Route 95 near exit 19 in Providence, RI, injuring plaintiff Donna Rose in Sept. 2003.
- Plaintiff showed ongoing back/pain and required two spinal surgeries (2005 and 2008) and substantial medical expenses.
- Jury found 75% fault attributed to Cariello and awarded $193,584 for damages in Oct. 2011.
- Plaintiff moved for a new trial/additur alleging the verdict and damages were inadequate; trial court granted additur but defendants rejected it.
- Trial court ultimately granted a new trial on damages; this Court affirms the grant and remands for new damages trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly granted a new trial on damages | Rose argues damages were shockingly inadequate | Cariello contends the award reflected weight of evidence | Yes; damages award shocks the conscience; new trial affirmed on damages only. |
| Whether the trial court properly exercised independent judgment in weighing the evidence | Court should assess credibility and weight independently | Jury credibility determinations should stand | Yes; trial court properly exercised independent judgment in weighing the evidence. |
| Whether the trial court erred in discounting expert testimony to support damages | Feldmann supported permanent injury and lost earnings | Morgan contradicted causation and extent of injury | No reversible error; court supported its conclusion that damages were inadequate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gomes v. Rosario, 79 A.3d 1262 (R.I. 2013) (standard for reviewing a motion for a new trial; superjuror role of trial court)
- McGarry v. Pielech, 47 A.3d 271 (R.I. 2012) (weight of the evidence and credibility in Rule 59 analyses)
- Morgera v. Hanover Ins. Co., 655 A.2d 698 (R.I. 1995 (mem.)) (grounds to set aside a verdict; substantial justice between parties)
- Bonn v. Pepin, 11 A.3d 76 (R.I. 2011) (damages may be reconsidered when jury award shocks conscience)
- Reccko v. Criss Cadillac Co., 610 A.2d 542 (R.I. 1992) (damages may be reviewed for clearly erroneous basis in compensation)
- Murray v. Bromley, 945 A.2d 330 (R.I. 2008) (damages review—shock the conscience standard)
- English v. Green, 787 A.2d 1146 (R.I. 2001) (damages may be set aside if shock the conscience or clearly erroneous)