150 Conn.App. 442
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Collision on I-95 (June 11, 2007): defendant truck merged into plaintiff’s lane; plaintiff’s car flipped; she sustained multiple physical injuries and ongoing symptoms (headaches, insomnia, numbness) and could not return to prior full-time employment.
- Plaintiff sued for personal injuries (including concussion, post-concussion syndrome, PTSD); defendant admitted liability; trial limited to causation and damages.
- At trial, plaintiff presented treating physicians’ records and depositions; records included references to PTSD by neurologists (Drs. Cuzzone and Story) and to a possible/resolving traumatic brain injury (TBI) in a neurosurgeon’s report (Dr. Kaye).
- Defendant moved in limine to exclude PTSD references and to redact TBI references; trial court denied both motions; Story’s deposition and Kaye’s report were admitted (Kaye did not testify live).
- Jury awarded $82,959.89 economic and $288,000 noneconomic damages (total $370,959.89); defendant moved for remittitur and to set aside verdict; trial court denied those motions; defendant appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of treating neurologists’ references/opinions about PTSD | References were probative; treating physicians may offer opinions helpful to jury about symptoms and probable diagnoses | Neurologists not qualified to diagnose PTSD (a psychiatric condition); their PTSD references should be excluded as beyond their specialty and not stated to reasonable medical probability | Court affirmed admission: specialty mismatch alone does not bar expert opinion; testimony was probative and any weakness went to weight, not admissibility |
| Admission of neurosurgeon’s report referencing TBI | Report was a business record; references to possible/resolving TBI were part of clinician’s diagnostic reasoning and relevant because TBI can encompass concussion | Plaintiff did not claim TBI; reference was irrelevant and potentially confusing; should be redacted absent a formal TBI diagnosis | Court affirmed admission: references were not definitive diagnoses and were relevant (TBI term overlaps with concussion); any error was not shown to be harmful |
| Sufficiency of evidence for PTSD/TBI causation | Treating physicians’ records and testimony supported jury’s view that PTSD/post-concussive symptoms were likely and caused impairment | References to PTSD/TBI were speculative and inflated damages; remittitur required because noneconomic award excessive and based on inadmissible speculation | Court affirmed denial of remittitur: jury verdict was supported by evidence, did not shock the conscience, and amount falls within reasonable range of damages |
| Motion to set aside verdict (abandoned in brief) | N/A | Argued verdict should be set aside as excessive/unsupported | Court’s denial was not challenged on appeal and claim was treated as abandoned |
Key Cases Cited
- Washington v. Christie, 58 Conn. App. 96 (standard of review for evidentiary rulings and harmfulness requirement)
- State v. Robles, 103 Conn. App. 383 (trial court has wide discretion to qualify experts)
- Healy v. White, 173 Conn. 438 (probabilities-in-balance standard vs. speculation for medical causation)
- State v. Nunes, 260 Conn. 649 (reasonable medical probability standard; form of expression not dispositive)
- Saleh v. Ribeiro Trucking, LLC, 117 Conn. App. 821 (standards governing remittitur and deference to jury verdict)