371 Ga. App. 543
Ga. Ct. App.2024Background
- Bettie Leverette sued Walmart after being struck by a pallet jack operated by employees while shopping, claiming damages for pain, suffering, and future medical expenses.
- At trial, medical evidence was presented from both sides concerning the nature, origin, and progression of Leverette's symptoms, complicated by her numerous pre-existing health conditions.
- Leverette’s experts opined she suffered a concussion and post-concussion syndrome caused by the incident, while Walmart’s experts disputed causation and the severity of the injury.
- The jury awarded Leverette $1,000,000 in nominal damages but no damages for pain/suffering or medical expenses; Walmart’s request for a nominal damages option on the verdict form was granted.
- Walmart moved for a new trial, alleging the award was excessive as a matter of law and was tainted by prejudicial cross-examination of their expert; the trial court denied the motion and upheld the verdict.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether $1,000,000 as nominal damages is excessive as a matter of law | Jury may award large nominal damages if justified by facts; relativity applies | Amount is excessive and inconsistent with purpose of nominal damages | Not excessive; size alone not grounds for reversal absent clear bias/prejudice |
| Whether prejudicial cross-examination of Walmart's expert tainted the verdict | Examined prior conduct to show bias/methodology, not improper | Cross-examination insinuated bias, suggesting sexual impropriety and prejudicing jury | Properly within trial court’s discretion; no prejudice or bias found from cross-examination |
Key Cases Cited
- Kohl v. Tirado, 256 Ga. App. 681 (assesses judicial discretion for interfering with jury damages awards)
- Booker v. Older Americans Council of Middle Ga., 278 Ga. App. 407 (rare circumstances justify setting aside a jury’s damages award)
- Wright v. Wilcox, 262 Ga. App. 659 (large nominal damages cannot be set aside for size alone)
- First Federal Sav. & Loan Assn. of Atlanta v. White, 168 Ga. App. 516 (nominal damages may vary based on circumstances)
- Cotto Law Group v. Benevidez, 362 Ga. App. 850 (nominal damages as general damages in tort)
- Duckworth v. Collier, 164 Ga. App. 139 (nominal damages where actual loss and extent are uncertain)