State Farm. Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Harmon, 2018 Fla. App. Lexis 917

Evidence of medical treatment a plaintiff might possibly need in the future is insufficient to award future medical expenses.

In this personal injury case, the driver sought recovery from her uninsured motorist carrier. The jury awarded her damages for future medical expenses. The insurer moved for a new trial or remittitur regarding the award of future medical expenses on the basis that there was insufficient evidence to support the award. The insured’s treating physician testified that the insured would need follow up visits and “may” need different modalities of treatment in the future that “might” include trigger point injections and other treatments. The trial court denied the insurer’s request for a new trial or remittitur. On appeal, the court held that there must be an evidentiary basis upon which the jury can, with reasonable certainty, determine those expenses. Further, the court held that past medical expenses alone do not provide a reasonable basis for a jury to draw inferences in order to compute the costs of future medical care. The Appellate Court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded for the trial court to grant the insurer’s motion for remittitur or to conduct a new trial limited to determination of future medical expenses.

 

Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2018

Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2018 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.