Opinion ID: 2240281
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Decedent's Pain and Suffering

Text: The next issue for our consideration is whether damages for pain and suffering should have been awarded. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff $5,000 for the decedent's pain and suffering. Coast and Coleman claimed that this award was against the manifest weight of the evidence because there was no evidence that the decedent sustained any physical injury. However, we believe there was ample evidence to sustain such an award. At the trial, Henrici testified: [When the back of the boat went down] I received a shock, like a shock you get from putting your finger in a light socket.    I looked at Jana and Donna, and they were both very surprised. Apparently, they had also been shocked. There was also evidence of electrical sparks showering down on the boat; fish in the surrounding water dying from electrocution and floating on the water; the decedent being frightened and panicked and, in an attempt to escape, diving into the water, at which time she was electrocuted and burned. The appellate court held that Henrici's testimony, standing alone, was insufficient to establish pain and suffering by the decedent. Such a conclusion contradicts the evidence in this case. See Landreth v. Reed (Tex. Civ. App. 1978), 570 S.W.2d 486, 492. We therefore hold that the appellate court erred in concluding that the plaintiff should not have been awarded damages for decedent's pain and suffering.