$1.15 Million Jury Verdict in Northern District Federal Court Trip and Fall Case
On Tuesday a federal court jury in the Western Division of the Northern District of Mississippi returned a plaintiff's verdict of $1.15 million in Whiteaker v. Fred's Stores of Tennessee. The case involved a trip and fall accident outside a Fred's Store in Southaven.
Here is the Complaint. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff tripped and fell on a wooden corral outside the store that was set up to create a maze that made it harder for shoplifters to get out of the store. The fall resulted in the plaintiff breaking both arms, injuring her neck and chest and breaking several teeth.
Here is Fred's Memo. Supporting Motion for Summary Judgment.
Here is the plaintiff's response.
Here is the Order denying the motion. The Court's opinion characterized plaintiff's case as weak, but involving fact questions for a jury. The judgment and verdict form were not filed on Pacer as of this posting.
The trial lasted two days with Judge Michael Mills presiding. Philip Stroud of Southaven and James Lees of Charleston, West Virginia represented the plaintiff. Robert Jolly and Scott Hollis of Watkins Ludlam's Olive Branch office represented Fred's.
The links are dead :-(
I think I have resolved the problem with the links. I am posting the links again.
Remittitur, anyone?
Okay, I just read the order. Perhaps this case should've gone to a jury, perhaps not.
But did Judge Mills really resolve that issue without citing a single case on premises liability? Not one?
My faith in the quality of the federal judiciary just took a hit.
The amount of damages is the only thing that is noteworthy about the case. As far the summary judgment motion, I'm surprised one was even filed since it's obviously a factual dispute between "our barricade was safe" vs. "no it wasn't." In my experience, cases like this either settle (usually) or go to trial.
MS premises law is all over map since Tharp.
“[W]here the invitee knows or should know of an apparent danger, no warning is required.” Tate v. S. Jitney Jungle Co., 650 So. 2d 1347, 1350 (Miss. 1995). That's post-Tharp (tho not by much).
I don't think the SJ motion was obviously a bad idea, even if it failed.
The verdict *could* stand, depending on the medicals, lost wages, etc. But it's awfully high-looking.
Fault assessed 81% to the store, remainder to plaintiff.
Good work for the plaintiff. Much harder to overturn the liability finding. Damages, still look high unless there's some good lost wages/med bills.
@Julien. She fell and broke both arms. And some teeth. Which is a pretty good (or bad) injury.
The award itself was general -- no breakdown by category.
Jury first wrote 81-19 for the plaintiff/defense and crossed it out.
The Plaintiff was not only seriously injured, she lost significant use of her left arm. Fred's never offered her a dime claiming that she should have seen the barricade and avoided it.
The jury got this one right!
"Which is a pretty good (or bad) injury."
It's good, but it's not $1M good.
Now, the "significant use of her left arm" might push the actuals close enough to $1.15M that the court leaves it alone.
But again, premises law is a mess in Mississippi; I can't fault the defense lawyers for trying, tho after they lost the SJ motion Fred's should've offered something.