Opinion ID: 1936466
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: Verdict for Karen

Text: Karen sought damages for her medical expenses and pain and suffering. She suffered two cracked ribs in the collision and was treated at the hospital. After the collision, she developed an unusual amount of fatigue and a generalized sensation of pain, which she likened to having the flu. About 4 months after the collision, she was diagnosed as having posttraumatic stress syndrome, which she was told would improve in time. In addition, she was treated for her lingering pain by a chiropractor until May 1998, when he determined that she had reached maximum medical improvement. Karen continues to suffer from pain in her lower back and hip area. During her testimony, Karen described the pain as being not intolerable pain and stated that it is the type of pain that an aspirin [can] take care of. Her documented medical expenses were $2,963.24. Karen also made a consortium claim. Damages for loss of consortium represent compensation for a spouse who has been deprived of rights to which he or she is entitled because of the marriage relationship, namely, the other spouse's affection, companionship, comfort, assistance, and particularly his or her conjugal society. Anson v. Fletcher, 192 Neb. 317, 220 N.W.2d 371 (1974). Here, Karen testified that before the collision, she and Dean had a good sexual relationship, but that now the relationship is pretty much non-existent. She further testified that Dean lacks the stamina that he had before the collision and that he is unable to perform household chores with the same regularity that he did before the collision. The amount of evidence supporting the jury's verdict for Karen is not overwhelming. But we are dealing with types of damagespain and suffering and loss of consortiumfor which the law provides no precise measurement. See Brandon v. County of Richardson, 264 Neb. 1020, 1029, 653 N.W.2d 829, 837 (2002). Although the verdict was generous, we conclude it was not so excessive as to be the result of passion, prejudice, mistake, or some other means not apparent in the record. When viewed in a light most favorable to Karen, the evidence shows that because of the collision, she has suffered and will continue to suffer some pain, and that because of Dean's injuries, she suffered a loss of Dean's assistance and conjugal society. Thus, the court acted within its discretion in concluding that the jury verdict for Karen was not excessive. AFFIRMED.