Background

• Gonzalez, an inmate, sued under the FTCA alleging negligent delay in treating a leg injury sustained during prison softball.
• The district court found the government liable and awarded $813,000 in compensatory damages after a bench trial.
• In 2004 Gonzalez injured his left leg and ankle; initial Health Services visits were delayed and he lacked crutches/wheelchair.
• X-rays and proper diagnosis were delayed for several weeks, leading to surgery for an open reduction and internal fixation.
• The district court found a breach of duty in the four weeks prior to x-ray, and that post-surgical pain was proximately caused by the delay.
• The government appeals claiming the damages award is excessive; the court of appeals affirms under deferential review of a bench-trial damages award.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Overton v. United States, 619 F.2d 1299 (8th Cir.1980) (deferential review of non-jury damages with no strict standard)
• Solomon Dehydrating Co. v. Guyton, 294 F.2d 439 (8th Cir.1961) (plain injustice or monstrous result standard for excessiveness)
• Taken Alive v. Litzau, 551 F.2d 196 (8th Cir.1977) (no precise measuring stick for general damages; highly subjective)
• Morrissey v. Welsh Co., 821 F.2d 1294 (8th Cir.1987) (pain-and-suffering awards are highly subjective; wide range possible)
• McCabe v. Parker, 608 F.3d 1068 (8th Cir.2010) (comparisons to other verdicts not always helpful; assess facts)
• Hysell v. Iowa Pub. Serv. Co., 534 F.2d 775 (8th Cir.1976) (danger of punitive-like windfalls; improper for FTCA)
• King v. United States, 553 F.3d 1156 (8th Cir.2009) (Rule 52(a)(1) findings required for meaningful review)
• Arpin v. United States, 521 F.3d 769 (7th Cir.2008) (reasoned articulation required for non-jury damages)