No. 73,122 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, S F.S. 1987)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "No. 73,122 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, S 768.77 F.S. 1987)"

Ashlyn Roberts
8 years ago
Views:

1 CORRECTED OPINION No. 73,122 IN RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS (CIVIL CASES 88-2) [March 2, PER CURIAM. The Florida Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Intruction (Civil) ha recommended to thi Court that the Florida Bar be authorized to publih a addition to Florida Standard Jury Intruction (Civil), ubject to the uage and qualification tated in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.985, Standard Jury Intruction, the two model form of itemized damage verdict with a note on ue and comment, entitled: and MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, S F.S. 1987) MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, F.S. 1987) The committee report that it recommendation i the product of effort by the committee, for more than a year, to devie a baic form of damage verdict that i both reponive to the requirement of ection and , Florida Statute (1987) (chapter , ection 56, 57, Law of Florida), and conervative of the value, implicity chief among thee, that the bench and bar have long aociated with general verdict. It ugget that the model form are a reaoned accommodation of one imperative to the other.

(Civil), ubject to the uage and qualification tated in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.

2 We invited comment regarding the committee' recommendation and entertained oral argument on it requet. Some legitimate concern ha been expreed in demanding of a jury a calculation of reducing award for future damage to preentday value. It ha been uggeted that we hould ignore the proviion of ection and in tructuring verdict form becaue of a perceived legilative invaion of a judicial function. Without paing on any contitutional objection we accept the committee' recommendation a a good faith effort to accommodate the legilature and the court and thu approve the publication a requeted.* Thee form are the reult of great tudy, conideration, and compromie and are worthy of publication. A we have alway tated, however, our approval for publication i not an adjudication on the merit of the form, ubtance, or correctne of the intruction nor an approval of the note and comment of the committee. Any litigant, in an appropriate forum, may raie any iue in connection with their ue. We commend the committee for concientiou, dedicated ervice in providing thee model form. The new form are attached to thi opinion and will be effective immediately upon it filing. It i o ordered. EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., Concur * The committee may wih to prepare an additional intruction adviing a jury on how to reduce future damage to preent value. -2-

77 and 768.78 in tructuring verdict form becaue of a perceived legilative invaion of a judicial function.

3 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, S F.S. 1987) Thee or imilar intruction hould appear in the verdict form after finding on liability iue. If you find for (defendant), you need not proceed further except to ign and return your verdict. anwering the following quetion you will determine 'the damage if any that (name claimant or claimant) utained a a reult of the incident in quetion. BY [In determining the amount of damage, do not make any reduction becaue of the negligence, if any, of (name). If you find that (name) wa to any extent negligent, the court in entering judgment will make an appropriate reduction in the damage awarded.] 1. What i the amount of any damage utained for [medical expene] [and] [lot earning or earning ability] in the pat? $ 2. What i the amount of any future damage for [medical expene] [and] [lot earning ability] to be utained in future year? a. Total damage over future year? $ b. The number of year over which thoe future damage are intended to provide compenation? c. What i the preent value of thoe future damage? 3. What i the amount of any damage for [pain and uffering] [, diability] [, phyical impairment] [, difigurement] [, mental anguih] [,inconvenience] [, aggravation of a dieae or phyical defect] [or] [lo of capacity for the enjoyment of life], a. in the pat? TOTAL DAMAGES OF (name claimant) (add line 1, 2c, 3a and 3b) 4. What i the amount of any damage utained by (name poue) in lo of [hi wife'] [her huband'] ervice, comfort, ociety and attention, a. in the pat? TOTAL DAMAGES OF (name claimant poue) - -3-

anwering the following quetion you will determine 'the damage if any that (name claimant or claimant) utained a a reult of the incident in quetion.

4 Note on ue of itemized verdict form The clarity of the verdict form and the accuracy of the "TOTAL DAMAGES" verdict depend on the form calling for item 2a, the total economic damage to be utained over future year, to be inerted in the indented column a hown in the model rather than in the far column of figure to be added for a um of ''TOTAL DAMAGES". If the verdict form available in a particular cae cannot clearly differentiate thoe column, the Committee recommend that the "TOTAL DAMAGES" um be omitted to avoid the poibility of the jury adding future economic damage twice. Comment on itemized verdict form 1. Thi verdict form repreent the Committee' effort to deign the leanet poible model conforming to a defenible interpretation of and.78, F.S It publication doe not imply any view of the contitutionality of S under Art. 11, Sec. 3, Fla. Cont., nor any view of whether or when the partie by agreement may dipene with verdict item that the Committee interpret the tatute to require. 2. The Committee acknowledge but doe not adopt certain interpretation of SS and.78 that would require a materially different verdict form: the view that the tatute require only an undicloed computation of preent value, not the future total, a well, of future economic damage; the view that different type of economic damage mut be itemized eparately and reduced eparately to preent value; and the view that the number of year of future noneconomic damage mut be et forth by the trier of fact. The Committee' rationale i dicued at greater length in The Florida Bar New, Vol. 15, No. 15 (Augut 1, 1988). 3. Although S may well be read a requiring pecification of the number of year of future noneconomic -4-

If the verdict form available in a particular cae cannot clearly differentiate thoe column, the Committee recommend that the "TOTAL DAMAGES" um be omitted to avoid the poibility of the jury adding

5 damage, the complexity added to the verdict i to no end: that information erve no purpoe in S , Alternative method of payment of [economic] damage award. The quetioned language in apparently i a remnant of tatute effective from 1976 to 1985 requiring itemization in medical malpractice verdict. S F.S. (1976 Supp.), repealed by Ch , Sec. 1. Former S , however, authorized extended payout of future noneconomic a well a economic damage, a purpoe abent from preent S Verdict itemized a required by thoe former tatute were commonly waived, accounting for the abence of judicial deciion and a recommended model form of verdict appropriate to the former tatute. 4. A i apparent, the Committee' trategy i to preerve the characteritic of a general verdict inofar a the tatute may be interpreted to grant that latitude, and to avoid any elaboration whoe general acceptance would tend to preempt quetion requiring a judicial deciion that additional itemization i or i not neceary. 5. Parent' damaqe for lo of child' ervice and earning. The Committee expree no opinion of whether uch future damage are "economic" within the meaning of f (2) and require itemization of year and reduction to preent value. -5-

51, however, authorized extended payout of future noneconomic a well a economic damage, a purpoe abent from preent S 763.78.

6 * MODEL FORM OF VERDICT ITEMIZING WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES (TORT REFORM ACT OF 1986, S F.S. 1987) Thee or imilar intruction hould appear in the verdict form after finding on liability iue. If you find for (defendant), you need not proceed further except to ign and return your verdict. anwering the following quetion you will determine the damage if any that (name claimant or claimant) utained a a reult of the incident in quetion. BY [In determining the amount of damage, do not make any reduction becaue of the negligence, if any, of (name). If you find that (name) wa to any extent negligent, the court in entering judgment will make an appropriate reduction in the damage awarded.] What i the amount of any earning lot by the etate from the date of injury to the date of death? (Do not include amount of any upport lot by a urvivor in that period.) What i the amount of any net accumulation lot by the etate? What i the amount of any medical or funeral expene reulting from (name') injury and death charged to the etate or paid by omeone other than a urvivor? What i the amount of any medical or funeral expene paid by (name), a urvivor? What i the amount of any lo by (name urvivor) of the decedent' upport and ervice, a. from the date of injury to the preent? 6. $ What i the number of year over which thoe future damage are intended to provide compenation? What i the preent value of thoe future damage? What i the amount of any damage utained by (name poue) in the lo of [hi wife'] [her huband'] companionhip and protection and in pain and uffering a a reult of the decedent' injury and death, a. in the pat? a -6-

7 7. What i the amount of any damage utained by (name minor child) in the lo of parental companionhip, intruction and guidance, and in the child' pain and uffering a a reult of the decedent' injury and death, a. in the pat? 8. What i the amount of any damage utained by (name parent) in pain and uffering a a reult of the injury and death of (name minor child), a. in the pat? Yote on Ue and Comment See Note on Ue and Comment upra, SJI -7-

8 Original Proceeding - Standard Jury Intruction (Civil) Robert P. Smith, Jr., Chairman, Committee on Standard Jury Intruction (Civil), Tallahaee, Florida, and Donald H. Partington, Penacola, Florida, for Petitioner SatUtIy S. Cacciatore Jr. of Nance, Cacciatore, Sieron & Duryea, P.A., Melbourne, Florida and C. Rufu Pennington, 111, Jackonville, Florida, for the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyer; T. Rankin Terry, Jr. of Terry & Terry, Fort Myer, Florida; and Jee S. Faerber of Fenter and Faerber, P.A., Plantation, Florida, Reponding -8-

Partington, Penacola, Florida, for Petitioner SatUtIy S. Cacciatore Jr. of Nance, Cacciatore, Sieron & Duryea, P.A.

No. 64,976. [November 1, 1984] The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions

No. 64,976. [November 1, 1984] The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions ,. No. 64,976 THE FLORIDA BAR RE: STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS - CIVIL (PROFESSIONAL l1alpractice) [November 1, 1984] McDONALD, J. The Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Civil) has submitted