Opinion ID: 1608539
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Pre-death Physical and Mental Pain and Suffering.

Text: We have long acknowledged that [p]ain and suffering damages are compensable even if the injured person was not conscious for an extended period of time. Kuta v. Newberg, 600 N.W.2d 280, 285 (Iowa 1999); see also Lang v. City of Des Moines, 294 N.W.2d 557, 562 (Iowa 1980); Schlichte v. Franklin Troy Trucks, 265 N.W.2d 725, 727 (Iowa 1978); Hurtig v. Bjork, 258 Iowa 155, 162, 138 N.W.2d 62, 66 (1965). Such damages may not be recovered `if death or unconsciousness is instantaneous,' but `if substantial evidence shows the decedent did suffer pain the item is submissible although the period of consciousness was not protracted.' Kuta, 600 N.W.2d at 285 (citation omitted). Ultimately, [t]he issue is whether [the injured party] was sufficiently conscious in extent and time that reasonable minds could differ as to whether he suffered pain. Schlichte, 265 N.W.2d at 727. The jury awarded the Estate a total of $100,000 for Jillene's physical and mental pain and suffering from the date of her injury to the date of her death. Unfortunately, the term date in the description of the period of Jillene's survival is deceptive: it is highly likely that she survived only moments from her injury to her passing. As explained by Dr. Francis Garrity, the Polk County medical examiner and the lone medical expert testifying in the trial on this issue, Jillene likely was shot first in the head: A. ... As far as the range of or order of firing is concerned, I think it's reasonable to speculateand I emphasize this is speculationthat the first shot likely, although I can't prove it, likely was the shot to the face. Or the head shot. And I say that because there was relatively little blood or bleeding associated with the wounds to the chest even though those bullet holes went through the heart and the aorta. As I recall, there was just over 100 cc's of bloodthat's a half cup of waterin the chest compartment where at least three bullet paths made their way.... ... Q. Let me ask you this, Doctor Garrity. What type of pain or what type of reaction would one have when being shot with a gun? A. I think it depends on the location of the body. A shot to the head, of course, is going to result in immediate incapacitation, immediate unconsciousness, and oftentimes immediate death.... ... Q. I understand, Doctor Garrity, that it is, in fact, your opinion that Jill Long was not unconscious immediately?... Do you have any recollection or knowledge of that? A. It's vague. No, I don't, actually. And if the first shot was a shot to the head it means incapacitation, instant incapacitation, but not necessarily a death right away. Death may follow within minutes, hours or in fact may follow it in days in the hospital. We know historically that she died at the scene shortly thereafter. So there is no question that she was incapacitated immediately following the incident. And may have died instantly. Again, it's somewhat speculative. But there is no wayshe at least survived for a short period of time, enough to bleed somewhat in the lung. Now, if she died right away it seems to me there would have been no evidence of any hemorrhage in the chest. Considering the standards for the award of pre-death mental and physical pain and suffering in relation to the testimony elicited by the plaintiff at trial, we believe that damages for Jillene's pre-death pain and suffering were not warranted in this case. Damages for pre-death mental and physical pain and suffering may not be recovered `if death or unconsciousness is instantaneous.' Kuta, 600 N.W.2d at 285 (citation omitted). The testimony of the medical expert in this case indicated it was likely that Jillene was shot first in the head, a wound that would result in immediate incapacitation, immediate unconsciousness, and oftentimes immediate death. The bullet entered the left cheek area of her face, and traveled at a sharp angle up into her brain. The Estate had the burden to show by substantial evidence that Jillene was sufficiently conscious in extent and time that reasonable minds could differ as to whether [she] suffered pain. Schlichte, 265 N.W.2d at 727. However, the evidence indicated the opposite: that Jillene likely, and mercifully, suffered immediate unconsciousness. [7] Thus, damages for pre-death mental and physical pain and suffering were not warranted under the facts of this case, contrary to the conclusion of the jury and the district court.