I awarded $1 million dollars for the loss of his wife. I don’t know if the loss of his wife is ten times as traumatic as the loss of his mother, but I do know the loss would be harder to take. People expect to outlive their parents by a wide margin, but not their spouse. Should he have received more or less? Should the fact they had a child together increase the award? What if they had multiple children? How about the length of the marriage – does that matter? What if it was a short marriage, but an extended courtship? What if they weren’t a man and wife, but a same-sex couple that couldn’t get married but were raising a child together? How about if the parents were on the verge of divorce? Or if it came out during the trial that the father had been having an affair? Does the quality of a marriage effect how much one spouse should receive for the death of another? If so, does that mean that defense attorneys should be able to dig for dirt on the marriage? More hard questions to which there really are no right answers.

I awarded $2 million for the loss of his legs because I think the effects of such a loss will be longer-lasting than the loss of the man’s wife and mother. Ten years after the loss of his wife, he may remarry. The memories of his wife will dim with the passage of time. But he’ll never grow another pair of legs. He’ll never walk again. Does awarding twice as much for the loss of his legs as the loss of his wife diminish the value of his wife’s life? Am I underestimating man’s ability to overcome the loss of limb and overestimating man’s ability to overcome the loss of a loved one? Prosthetics have come a long way; should he receive less money if prosthetics would let him walk and run again? Or what if leg transplants became available? What if the leg transplants cost $5 million dollars? Or $50 million? How much is too much? I would note that since damage caps are only intended to apply to noneconomic damages, it is possible that the father could indeed receive $50 million for his medical bills.

For the trauma of seeing his child spend the rest of its life in a wheelchair, I awarded the father $500,000. In many jurisdictions, the father would be entitled to nothing for this, since he wasn’t injured. Surely, the pain of seeing your child’s life destroyed like this is worth something, isn’t it? You tell me.

The Child:

I awarded $1 million dollars to the child for the loss of its mother. Since the child was so young, its mother would have still played a very important role in its development. Even more so since she was a stay-at-home mother. I haven’t identified whether the child was a boy or a girl. Would that matter? Should a boy receive more or less money for the loss of his mother than a girl? Or does gender not matter? Also, what if the mother didn’t stay at home but worked full-time. Should the child receive less? If the mother had lived and the father died, should the award change?

I awarded $50,000 for the loss of the child’s grandmother. I assumed she was a typical grandmother and saw the child on holidays, birthdays, etc. What if the grandmother raised the child because the mother was in and out of drug rehab? I would have awarded more. Would I have been out of line to award $1 million for the loss of the grandmother and $50,000 for the loss of the mother in such a case? Do blood relationships have more intrinsic value than personal relationships? If so, does that mean that the loss of an adopted mother can never be worth as much as the loss of a biological mother?

For total paralysis, I awarded the child $5,000,000. Part of the reason I awarded such a large amount was the young age of the child. But then again, I awarded $2 million to the much-older father who “only” lost his legs. Does this mean I should give the child more or give the father less? Should the size of the award change depending upon whether the child was active in sports? How about if the child was mentally retarded before the accident – should a retarded person receive less money than a person of normal mental development for the same injuries? If so, does that mean that retarded people aren’t worth as much as normal people? And wouldn’t that also mean that a genius should receive more money than a person of normal intelligence?

Later this week, I’ll post a wrap-up on why cases like this prove damage caps are a bad idea. Hopefully, someone will have the courage before then to post their own damage awards and the reasons behind them.