Kevin Bryant v. Robert Lee Rimrodt and Geico General Insurance Company
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
: MANSFIELD, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part),
I' agree that a new trial is required because the special verdict awarding $16,937.53 for past medical expenses is inconsistent with the special verdict awarding only á nominal one dollar for past pain and suffering. However, there is no reason for the new trial to encompass all damages. Everyone received a fair trial below, and- the jury clearly rejected Bryant’s claims for ongoing or future harm. That is, the jury awarded Bryant nothing for future medical expenses, future pain and suffering, loss of future earning capacity, or…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sunahara v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2012
- David J. Rice v. Community Health Association, D/b/a/ Jackson General Hospital, NoCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2000
- Brant v. BockholtSupreme Court of Iowa · 1995
- Fisher v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1999
- ITT Hartford Ins. Co. of the SE v. OwensSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.