Update on the $5.6 Million La Quinta Inn Near-drowning Case
Two different people have told me that they heard from a knowledgeable person that there will be no appeal in the Hinds County La Quinta Inn near-drowning case.
Typically, when a verdict of that size is paid and not appealed the defendant does not have any issues on which to base an appeal. That could have happened in this case if the plaintiffs agreed to all the defendants' jury instructions and never objected to defendant's evidence.
Damages would be hard to appeal. The liability caps do not apply to this verdict because most of the damages were economic.
A lot of people have a problem with the parents' conduct, but apportionment of fault was for the jury and that would be hard to reverse on appeal.
I have seen cases where the losing defendant had nothing to appeal and paid the judgment. This would not be the first time that has happened.
In addition, since the case is unlikely to be reversed and rendered, defendants may not want a new trial. Ogden would likely ask for the same $26 million in the second trial based on the life-care plans. So things could actually get a lot worse for the defendant. The defendant may not want to roll the dice.
Any rumor that Ogden may seek an additur, or challenge the court's allowing allocation vs. the parents?
I have not heard either. It's my understanding that the father admitted to being at fault, so I can't see apportionment to him being an issue. As for an additur, it sounds like that would be a thin argument.
A high low agreement is another reason there are not post trial motions or appeal in some cases.
Ogden has filed a motion for additur.