Large Verdict -- Or is it?
So here's the Headline... "Child wins huge damages over medical care"
A jury in California "awarded an estimated $96 million in future damages in the case of a child who developed a rare but serious neurological disorder caused by untreated jaundice shortly after his birth four years ago at Verdugo Hills Hospital."
What's important to note here is the word future. The current value of the verdict is $15 million. That's still a lot of money, but isn't it interesting that this media outlet decided to focus on the "huge" number of 96 million. It's Misleading. The current value is what would need to put aside today to meet the lifetime needs of $96 million.
Damages in medical malpractice lawsuits such as this are almost always calculated out into the future. One reason that this is done is to make sure that the child can put aside enough money TODAY to meet his or her needs 40 or more years from now. This is routine. Both the defense and plaintiff sides of malpractice cases do this.
It's still a big verdict, but let's not blow it out of proportion by focusing on the wrong number.
I thought CA has a limit on the amount of damage of medical malpractice law suit. How can someone win even the 15 million?
I believe that the limit on damages in California is on noneconomic damages. That means that a life plan that shows economic damages of 15 million or whatever might not be limited by the cap.