Ruling Gives Juries More Say In Personal-Injury Lawsuits
|
|
In a decision that could be costly for the state and for local governments, the New Jersey State Supreme Court ruled yesterday that it should be up to a jury, not a judge, to decide what constitutes disfigurement or loss of bodily function in a personal-injury lawsuit. The decision, which overturned an appellate ruling, will allow more claims to advance to the trial stage. Thus, it could add to the millions of dollars a year in jury awards already financed by taxpayers and prompt higher municipal insurance premiums, experts say. ”Is this going to have an impact?” asked William J. Kearns, general counsel for the New Jersey League of Municipalities. ”Of course it is, on all kinds of public entities: the state, counties, school districts, anything that comes under the Tort Claims Act,” the law governing such claims. The decision stems from a suit by a 70-year-old social worker, Catherine Gilhooly, who broke her kneecap and tore ligaments in her right knee on Dec. 31, 1994, when she slipped after walking on a wet floor at the Union County Jail, where she had gone to see a client. The trial judge, Leonard S. Sachar of Superior Court in Elizabeth, dismissed Ms. Gilhooly’s suit against the county, ruling that, following surgery to implant metal pins and a cable, she could walk again and had returned to work. The scar she was left with, while visible, did not significantly alter her appearance, the trial judge said. More : query.nytimes.com |