Court Opinion

ID: 9884827
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:16:00.102587+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:41.046805
License: Public Domain

NIERENGARTEN, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur with the decision because this case is not sufficiently distinguishable from Bianchi v. Nordby, 409 N.W.2d 835 (Minn.1987) to warrant reversal or remand. However, I am not surprised a jury could be misled by the special verdict form.
Like Bianchi, this case apparently involves misunderstandings by the jury which resulted in damages for the plaintiff which are substantially below the amount actually intended. Counsel and the courts should do all they can to aid the jury in understanding the verdict form so that the jury’s answers truly reflect the jury’s wishes. Special verdict forms should be drafted in precise language so juries can clearly indicate a prevailing party’s total damages. Although the special verdict form in this case conformed to the special verdict form suggested in 4 Minn. Practice, Civil JIG (3d ed. 1986), I concur with Justice Scott’s observation in Bianchi and suggest a modification of the form to minimize possible jury misunderstandings about the impact of their answers to the verdict. See Bianchi, 409 N.W.2d at 840. (“The form used may have been clearer if the word ‘total’ had been inserted before each category for future damages”).
The following modification of the special verdict form is suggested:
1. What sums of money will fairly and adequately compensate (claimant) for such future damages from the accident as are reasonably certain to occur for:
a. TOTAL loss of earnings?
$-
Over what period of time will such total loss of earnings, if any, occur? _years.
b. TOTAL medical expenses?
$-
Over what period of time will such total medical expenses, if any, occur? _years.
c.TOTAL damages for emotional distress, pain and disability?
$-
Over what period of time will such total damages for emotional distress, pain and disability, if any, occur? _ years.
Cf. Special Verdict Form No. 8 (Damages— Tort Reform Act), 4 Minn. Practice, Civil JIG at 470-71 (3d ed. 1986).