|
2219 After plaintiff presented evidence that an accident caused her to experience extensive pain and disability, which her experts attributed to myofascial pain syndrome, an award of $150,000 in general damages was not excessive as a matter of law, even though it was equivalent to 19 times special damages; a defendant who appealed the award on the ground of excessiveness was sanctioned for prosecuting a frivolous appeal.CitationWESTPHAL v WAL-MART (Myofascial Pain Syndrome) 68 CA4 1071 [See: Pool v City 42 C3 1051; Seffert v LA Transit 56 C2 498; Scofield v Critical 45 CA4 990, T/AT 6/96]
|
|
