## Facts

- A church-owned van driven by Lloyd Mitchell was returning children home from Sunday services in Beauregard Parish, Louisiana.
- At the East Iowa Road railroad crossing, the van collided with a northbound Kansas City Southern Railway (KCS) locomotive.
- The only passengers were Bobby and Nelda Duncan’s three daughters: Amanda (killed), Rachel (catastrophic spinal cord and brain injuries resulting in quadriplegia), and Myranda (less serious injuries).
- The plaintiffs alleged KCS failed to maintain adequate sightlines by clearing the right-of-way and failed to provide adequate warning signage at the crossing.
- The plaintiffs alleged Mitchell failed to stop and/or yield to the oncoming train.
- The plaintiffs alleged the parish failed to maintain its right-of-way and to install or maintain proper stop and railroad-crossing signs.
- A jury found KCS, Mitchell, and the parish negligent and a legal cause of the accident, and awarded total damages of $27,876,813.31, including $8,000,000 in general damages to Rachel and about $17,000,000 in future medical expenses.
- The court of appeal affirmed; the Louisiana Supreme Court granted review focused primarily on the size and evidentiary support for the damage awards.

## Issues

1. Whether the $8,000,000 general-damages award to Rachel for pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life was an abuse of the trier of fact’s discretion.
2. Whether the award for Rachel’s future medical expenses was proved with sufficient certainty and supported by the evidence.
3. What level of deference appellate courts must give to a jury’s assessment of general damages and when appellate modification is permitted.

## Decision

- The Louisiana Supreme Court affirmed the liability determinations and did not disturb the allocation of fault among the negligent actors.
- The court held the $8,000,000 general-damages award for Rachel was excessive and constituted an abuse of discretion.
- The court reduced Rachel’s general damages from $8,000,000 to $6,000,000 as the highest amount reasonably within the factfinder’s discretion for similar injuries.
- The court amended the future-medical-expense award to the highest amount supported by the record evidence, applying the requirement that such expenses be proven with some degree of certainty.
- The judgment was affirmed in part and amended in part.

## Legal Principles

- General damages are subject to the trier of fact’s broad discretion, but an appellate court may amend an award that exceeds the bounds of reasonable discretion based on the particular record.
- General damages cover non-pecuniary harms not susceptible of precise calculation, including physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life.
- Appellate reliance on comparable awards is appropriate only after a determination that the trier of fact abused its discretion, to identify the highest (or lowest) amount reasonably within discretion.
- Future medical expenses must be proven with some degree of certainty through competent evidence establishing the probability of future care and the expected cost.

## Conclusion

The Louisiana Supreme Court left liability intact but amended the damages, holding that even in catastrophic-injury cases a jury’s general-damages award may be reduced when it exceeds the outer bounds of discretion, and that future medical expenses must be recalculated to an amount supported by competent proof.


Duncan v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co., 773 So. 2d 670 (La. 2000)