Connecticut Jury Awards and Out-of-Court Settlements: Examples of Damages Awards

Gall Bladder Surgery Medical Malpractice Death Results in $2.2 Million Jury Verdict

In the case of Dos Santos v. Zarif, a jury awarded $1.5 million to the estate of artist and sculptor Luis Dos Santos and $700,00 in loss-of-consortium to his wife. A motion for remittitur was denied. Dos Santos was age 64 at the time of his death. The jury heard testimony of the decedent's enjoyment of life, of his teaching skills, and of his planned exhibitions for his works. (Matasavage, J., presiding in Waterbury).

Asbestos Litigation $1.15 Billion Settlement Reached. The Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. announced Dec. 19 that has agreed to settle for $1.15 billion with MacArthur Co. and its subsidiary, Western MacArthur Co., for coverage related to asbestos litigation policies. Hartford Financial will pay the enormous sum in the first quarter of 2004 from existing reserves. Payment will be held in escrow until certain conditions are met, according to Hartford Financial, and will thereafter be paid into a bankruptcy trust to fund present and future claims. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California must still approve the settlement, which is conditioned upon confirmation of a plan of reorganization that grants the insurer a channeling injunction against any future asbestos-related liability claims brought against MacArthur. A hearing on the fairness of the settlement in MacArthur's Chapter 11 proceedings (Western Asbestos Co., No. 02-46284, N.D. Calif. Bkcy.) was held on Jan. 9.

Travelers Insurance Settles Class Action Claims on Asbestos Injuries

Travelers Property Casualty Corp. announced Nov. 21 that the company arranged an out-of-court settlement with class action plaintiffs who claimed that the insurer violated state business laws by unfairly handling claims and settlement practices related to asbestos injury claims.

Product Liability Action With Few Ties To Connecticut Referred Back To Tennessee In a case that has seen venue transferred across three states, a federal judge in Connecticut finally ordered a case originally filed in Wisconsin transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee - for the second time (The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co. v. Broan-Nutone, L.L.C., No. 03-CV-733, D. Conn). Charter Oak is represented by Brian P. Henry of Tedford & Henry. Broan-Nutone is represented by Joseph Bree Burns and Putnam Hutchinson Perry of Rome McGuigan Sabanosh. All are located in Hartford, Conn.

Connecticut's District Court Urged To Dismiss Landfill Liability A Nov. 24 reply brief filed by Olin Corp. and the Town of Hamden maintains that the plaintiffs rely on new assertions and conclusions of law to support their claims of landfill liability, rather than carry their original burden of proof as written in case law and the local rules. Accordingly, the defendants continue to press the district court to dismiss the suit with prejudice. (Clarence R. Collins Jr., et al. v. Olin Corp., et al., No. 03-945, D. Conn.

Xerox Settles Litigation Over its Cash Balance Plan For $239 Million On Nov. 14, Xerox Corp. agreed, in principle, to settle for $239 million a class action lawsuit filed by Xerox retirees and pensioners over the Xerox cash balance plan (David Berger, et al. v. Xerox Corporation Retirement Income Guarantee Plan, No. 02-3674, 7th Cir.). Xerox Corp. Retirement Income Guarantee Plan will pay $239 million to plaintiffs and for legal fees, the company announced. Plaintiffs claimed the plan improperly calculated lump-sum distributions from cash balance accounts, resulting in lower benefits for certain employees who left the company between Jan. 1, 1990, and Dec. 31, 1999. Xerox reported $5.963 billion in pension assets and $7.931 billion in pension obligations as of last Dec. 31.

Pfizer Seeks To Consolidate Trovan Product Liability Suits in New York Pfizer Inc. has filed court documents to consolidate a product liability suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut with a similar suit filed in New York. Both suits involve deaths of Nigerians following the outbreak of an epidemic and the medical relief aid provided by Pfizer through their 1996 Trovan study. The Connecticut plaintiffs oppose the consolidation saying their suit involves claims arising under Connecticut state law and that much of the research and managerial and conspiracy activity took place in Connecticut (Ajdu Ismaila Adamu, et al. v. Pfizer Inc., No. 02-2104, D. Conn.).

Connecticut Judge: No Homeowner's Insurance Coverage for Sexual Assault On Nov. 14, a Connecticut Superior Court judge granted summary judgment to an insurance carrier against an insured in a case that posed the question of whether the homeowners insurer has a duty to defend or indemnify a policyholder for an underlying intentional sexual assault action. (Colonial Penn Insurance Co. v. James Dimitriadis, No. CV020392908, Conn. Super., Fairfield Jud. Dist. at Bridgeport; 2003 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3268).

Punitive Damages Possible in Product Liability Case On Nov. 10, a Connecticut state judge denied a manufacturer's motion to strike the punitive damages count as insufficiently pled in an action involving cheese that allegedly poisoned a woman. Thus the manufacturer will now face the possibility of punitive damages at trial should the plaintiff prove her case. (Nina Primini v. Liuzzi Markets, et al., No. CV020280469S, Conn. Super., Judicial Dist. of Meriden.)

Parachute Accidental Death Damages Waived by Release

A Superior Court judge ruled on Oct. 9 that when Christina Beaudry signed a detailed release agreement, she acknowledged the risks involved in riding in a powered parachute device. Accordingly, she assumed those risks and waved future claims for injuries she might sustain. This release precluded her estate from filing a wrongful death or product liability claim; thus, the court granted summary judgment to the parachute's manufacturer and operator. (Barry Dimaggio, Administrator for the Estate of Christina Beaudry v. Daniel Labrecque, et al., No. CV000438800S, Conn. Super. New Haven Jud. Dist.; 2003 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2823).

National Geographic Wins Dismissal Of Claims In Dispute Over CD-ROM National Geographic is privileged to use individual contributions (both photographs and articles) in the digital versions of its magazine where the contributions appear in substantially the same context as they did in print. This ruling is particularly significant, because many older television series are now seeing a second life in CD-ROM format, and the rights to those CD-ROMS have yet to be fully defined. (Douglas Faulkner et al. v. National Geographic Society et al., No. 97-09361, S.D. N.Y.).

Photos Of Barbie Dolls in Old Fashioned Kitchen Appliances Were Parodies Photographs the showed Mattel Inc.'s Barbie dolls placed next to vintage kitchen appliances amounted to parodies of old fashioned ideas and Free Speech protected by the First Amendment. The photographs do not violate Mattel's copyrights or trademarks, according to a three-judge panel of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. (Mattel Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions, 9th Cir.).

Verizon Does Not Need to Disclose Internet Service Subscriber Identities Subsection 512(h) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) does not require an Internet service provider (ISP), that serves “solely as a conduit for communications,� to comply with a subpoena issued for purposes of learning the identity of its subscriber list. This ruling came as a major blue to the Recording Industry of America in its witchhunt to prosecute individuals who downloaded music off the Internet without paying for it. First, the D.C. Circuit is widely regarded as one of the most influential circuits, along with the Ninth Circuit, in the U.S. Courts of Appeal – almost like a mini-U.S. Supreme Court in terms of its finality. Second, without the power the subpoena individual subscriber lists, the witchhunt prosecution of individuals and that threat was effectively brought to a standstill. (Recording Industry Association of America Inc. v. Verizon Internet Services Inc., No. 03-7015, D.C. Cir.).

General Motors Granted New Trial In Case That Led To $82 Million Verdict A divided 4-3 majority of the Alabama Supreme Court has granted General Motors a new trial after finding several jury selection irregularities that may have contributed to an $82 million verdict against it. But the court rebuffed the company's request for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL). (General Motors Corp. v. Wilbert Jernigan, individually and as father and next friend of Jeffrey Jernigan, a minor child, No. 1020069, Ala. Sup. Ct.)

Oregon Jury Orders Insurer To Pay $9.5 Million For Claims Fraud An Oregon jury on Dec. 5 ordered Farmers Insurance Co. to pay $9.5 million to policyholders who accused the insurer of defrauding them by reducing payments for their medical expenses after auto accidents (Mark Strawn v. Farmers Insurance Company of Oregon, et al., No. 9908-09080, Ore. Cir., Multnomah Co.).

Class Action Lawsuit for Overtime Pay Against Computer Sciences Corporation

Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, Lewis & Feinberg, PC, and Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff, LLP, have expanded their federal class action lawsuit against Computer Sciences Corporation. The amended class action seeks overtime pay on behalf of current and former technical support workers who install and/or maintain computer software and hardware for global IT conglomerate Computer Sciences Corporation ("CSC") in seven states, including Connecticut. Identified by Business Week (December 8, 2003) as a lawsuit that "could change the tech industry," the class action lawsuit charges that the company has a common practice of refusing to pay overtime compensation to its technical support workers in violation of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws. The lawsuit, entitled Giannetto, et al. v. Computer Sciences Corporation, has been filed in federal district court in Los Angeles. "You cannot avoid paying overtime wages by providing a fancy sounding title to workers who are entitled to overtime pay under the law," stated Steven G. Zieff, a partner with Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff.

Dr. Michael A. S. Guth, Ph.D., J.D., is a legal brief writer and law newspaper Editor-in-Chief. He writes a variety of articles on constitutional law, elder care, consumer credit card debt, appellate court term reviews, and law and society. See http://riskmgmt.biz/ for an introduction to his legal work, and http://riskmgmt.biz/lawarticles.htm for a listing of many of his articles. Dr. Guth writes legal articles and briefs for other law firms, and he assists pro se parties (those without a lawyer) in preparing documents they can file in court such as motions pertaining to child custody, visitation interference, and child support defense.