## Facts

- Graham McBeath and Evan Bustos were involved in a motor-vehicle collision in which McBeath fractured his neck.
- McBeath was hospitalized for two days and prescribed pain medication.
- McBeath sued Bustos for negligence, seeking $36,513 in special damages for medical expenses and $250,000 in general damages for pain and suffering.
- McBeath presented medical testimony that the collision caused his injury and offered uncontested evidence that he experienced pain from the injury.
- The trial court instructed the jury that it was required to award damages for each harm caused by Bustos’s negligence.
- The jury found Bustos negligent but assigned McBeath most of the comparative fault for the accident.
- The jury awarded McBeath $36,513 in special damages and $0 in general damages.
- The trial court denied McBeath’s motion for a new trial, and McBeath appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a verdict awarding medical-expense damages for a proven physical injury, while awarding zero general damages, is legally inadequate when evidence shows the plaintiff suffered at least some pain from that injury.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a new trial motion challenging the zero general-damages award.
3. Whether a comparative-fault finding can justify a zero award for pain and suffering when the jury has accepted that the plaintiff suffered an injury requiring medical treatment.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed the order denying McBeath’s motion for a new trial.
- The court concluded the damages verdict could not stand because the jury compensated McBeath for medical treatment of a fracture yet awarded nothing for pain and suffering despite undisputed evidence of pain.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion, including a new determination of damages.

## Legal Principles

- A jury has broad authority to decide the amount of noneconomic damages, but that authority has limits when the verdict conflicts with uncontradicted evidence.
- When a jury awards medical special damages for treatment of a proven physical injury and the evidence shows the plaintiff experienced some pain from that injury, a zero award for pain and suffering is legally inadequate.
- Comparative fault allows the reduction of damages by the plaintiff’s percentage of fault, but it does not permit a finding of no compensable pain where the jury has accepted the existence of an injury and treatment and the record shows some pain.
- A trial court abuses its discretion in denying a new trial when the damages award is inadequate as a matter of law on the record presented.

## Conclusion

McBeath v. Bustos held that, after a jury found negligence and awarded medical expenses for a neck fracture, it could not also award zero pain-and-suffering damages where the evidence showed McBeath experienced pain; the appellate court reversed the denial of a new trial and remanded for a new damages determination.


McBeath v. Bustos, 2014 WL 1088000 (2014)