Hill v. Diebold

ORDER

STEINBERG, United States Magistrate Judge.

In Ohio, a plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages to compensate him for losses he is “reasonably certain” to incur in the future. Galayda v. Lake Hosp. Sys., Inc., 71 Ohio St.3d 421, 644 N.E.2d 298 (1994) (citing Pennsylvania Co. v. Files, 65 Ohio St. 403, 62 N.E. 1047 (1901). The principal purpose of the “reasonable certainty” rule is to prevent the jury from speculating about future damages. Johnson v. English, *6355 Ohio App.2d 109, 214 N.E.2d 254, 260 (1966). Jury instructions which allow damages for pain and suffering which plaintiff would…