Opinion ID: 1796937
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Analysis of Damages Attributable to the Fall

Text: Fear by elderly persons of falls and broken bones is a well known phenomenon. Undoubtedly, Ms. Boutte sustained considerable damages because of her fall attributable to defendants' negligence. Nevertheless, the overall record does not support the amount of damages determined by the jury to be the result of the fall. The record establishes that Ms. Boutte was indeed a remarkable woman who suffered some decline in activity after her fall. However, the claims by plaintiffs of physical and mental deterioration caused by constant hip pain are contradicted by the totality of the medical evidence recorded mostly by independent doctors and medical personnel at unsuspicious times. Prior to her fall, Ms. Boutte was afflicted with severe conditions that required five hospitalizations in sixteen months, followed by the October 1988 hospitalization for congestive heart failure and acute pulmonary edema. The conditions, all serious by themselves and even more grave in combination, clearly were worsening with time and were not operable or fixable. The ulcers, then the gangrene, and then the cellulitis added to the basic diseases. Only aggressive and frequent treatments kept the conditions relatively under control. After the surgery necessitated by the October 1988 fall while Ms. Boutte was in intensive care for these conditions, she returned for seven follow-up visits with Dr. Kerstein, Dr. Rodriguez and Dr. Karcioglu through January 10, 1989. Contrary to the testimony of Ms. Boutte's relatives, she reported to Dr. Rodriguez that she was virtually free of pain by November 29, after she had been instructed to place weight on the hip five weeks earlier. Significantly, Dr. Rodriguez opined that the hip fracture was not a factor in any immobility the patient may have been experiencing. Dr. Kerstein, who was no longer associated with TMC at the time of trial, was the treating physician for the vascular problems that underlay her foot and leg complaints. He examined her four times between the surgery and January 10, 1989, and did not record any complaints of constant hip pain or of loss of the will to live that was claimed by her heirs. In fact, Dr. Kerstein's testimony reflected a particular attraction to and admiration for this patient, and he urged her to continue office visits every two or three weeks to keep on top of her many serious conditions. She did not return for ten weeks, and he attributed her greatly deteriorated condition on March 21, 1989 to this lack of treatment. In significant contrast to the January 10 visit, Ms. Boutte on March 21 was in the final stages of cardiac and vascular diseases. Additionally, between November 1988 and March 1989, Ms. Boutte did not have the home health care and therapy prescribed by Dr. Rodriguez. It was during this period, after remarkable progress in the almost two months following surgery, that Ms. Boutte's condition declined significantly. From this record it is evident that both the hip injury and the extremely serious pre-existing diseases combined, along with Ms. Boutte's advanced age, to cause the deterioration of her physical and mental conditions after October 1988. The jury apparently attributed most of the causation to the hip injury, but the record simply does not support such a conclusion. On this record, Ms. Boutte's preexisting and worsening conditions were the major cause of her decreased mobility and the other setbacks that diminished the quality of her life during her last seven months. Under these particular circumstances regarding the effects of this particular injury to this particular plaintiff, the jury abused its discretion in awarding $555,000 for the damages solely attributable to the hip injury. Accordingly, this court must determine the highest award which was reasonably within that discretion. Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc., 341 So.2d 332 (La.1976). Analyzing the cases with similar injuries cited by both plaintiffs and defendants, we conclude that the highest award supported by the evidence was $150,000.