Court Opinion

ID: 9723994
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 10:40:27.081125+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:53.981410
License: Public Domain

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE ROMITI, specially concurring: I too join with Justice Jiganti in his determination that the plaintiffs in these cases are entitled to seek recovery for the expenses of raising and educating the unplanned children which they allege were the result of defendant’s negligence. However, I also join with Justice Linn, but only to the extent of finding that the offsetting benefits plaintiffs may derive from having these unplanned children should neither be excluded as a matter of law from the calculation of damages nor should they be held to automatically offset all damages. As was stated in Troppi v. Scarf (1971), 31 Mich. App. 240, 256-57, 187 N.W.2d 511, 518-19: * ° we believe [the special benefits] rule to be essential to the rational disposition of this case and the others that are sure to follow. The essential point, of course, is that the trier must have the power to evaluate the benefit according to all the circumstances of the case presented. Family size, family income, age of the parents, and marital status are some, but not all, the factors which the trier must consider in determining the extent to which the birth of a particular child represents a benefit to his parents. That the benefits so conferred and calculated will vary widely from case to case is inevitable.” Allowing the application of the special benefits rule in these cases will grant the trier of fact a degree of flexibility in calculating damages which should result in more equitable awards, a goal expressed in the very terms of the rule.