Recent Jury Verdict Demonstrates the Risk of Litigation
Clients occasionally seem to be puzzled by the fact that, sometimes, even if they win a trial they might not obtain any monetary recovery. They generally realize that they could lose a trial--that the jury might decide completely against them. But not receiving money for injuries after a jury decides in their favor? Unimaginable.
However, the following recent jury verdict shows that this can happen and demonstrates how it can happen.
Pfc. Jesse Klingler was injured when he was shot at close range with a blank round by an actor hired by a local TV production company. The TV production company was working with the Marines to conduct a simulated interrogation during a military training exercise. Pfc. Klingler was participating as an on-duty marine in the exercise.
A jury awarded Pfc. Klingler $91,000. However, due to litigation strategy, allocation of fault, and the jury's verdict, Pfc. Klingler will not receive any portion of that verdict.
First, the TV production company offered to settle the claims against it, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sec. 998, in exchange for $250,000. Under CCP 998, when a defendant makes an offer of payment to a plaintiff to settle, the plaintiff rejects the offer, and obtains a verdict less than the offer, the plaintiff must pay for the defendants' litigation costs.
In this case, the TV production company offered Pfc. Klingler $250,000 to settle his claim against it. Pfc. Klingler, believing that a jury would award a substantially greater verdict to him, rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. In order for Pfc. Klingler to avoid paying the TV production company's litigation cost, he needed to obtain a verdict of $250,000 or more. Unfortunately, the verdict was only $91,000.
Defense costs in this case were probably $50,000 at least.
Second, the jury by law has to allocate the verdict to the responsible parties--whether they were part of the lawsuit or not. However, if a responsible party is not party to the lawsuit, the verdict cannot be enforced against them.
In this case, the jury found the TV production company only 25% at fault but found the Marine Corps--who was not a party to the lawsuit--75% at fault. Because the trial was only against the TV production company, Pfc. Klingler's verdict for pain and suffering was reduced by 75%. Both the Marines and the TV production company are jointly responsible for the economic damages--i.e., medical bills, loss of earnings, etc.
So, what does Pfc. Klingler end up with at the end of the day?
--$44,000 for medical bills and lost wages
--$11,750 for pain and suffering ($47,000 reduced by 75%)
--Total verdict of $55,750
--Less defense costs of $50,000+
--Less plaintiff costs of $50,000+
What an unfortunate outcome.
