Facts
In July 2007 8 and 9 year old children were left in a room at the La Quinta Inn on Briarwood Drive in North Jackson while their father took their mother to work. It was approximately 7:00 a.m. The parents threatened the children to not go near the pool.
The girl fell into the pool and pulled the boy in while he was trying to pull her out. I am assuming that they could not swim, but don't know. The kids screamed and guests called the front desk. Hotel employees pulled the children from the pool and revived them.
The hotel had another near drowning incident in 2005 when the gate was not locked during non-use hours. The gate to the pool was supposed to be locked from 10:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. The gate was left open and not locked on a regular basis.
The girl was in ICU at UMC for a month. The boy was in ICU for 8 days. The children had approx. $130,000 in medical bills.
The Trial
The case was styled Baby Jane Doe, et al v. La Quinta Franchising, LLC, et al; In the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi; Cause No. 08-495-CIV. The case was tried before Judge Winston Kidd and lasted eight days.
Ashley Ogden was plaintiffs' counsel.
Defense counsel were Ray McNamara and Monte Barton with Copeland Cook in Ridgeland and Charlene Priester of Jackson. Copeland Cook likely associated Priester on the case because she is African-American. McNamara took most of the witnesses for the defense and Priester closed for the defense. I understand that she did a really good job in her closing.
At trial former and current hotel employees testified that the hotel policy to close and lock the pool gate was frequently violated because the front desk clerks would lock themselves in the office at night due to crime on the property and their fear for their own safety. Former employees testified that the gate did not self-close as it was supposed to, and that during the summer neighborhood kids were constantly coming onto the property to swim in the pool. Employees testified management instructed the employees to watch out for children and keep the pool gate closed and locked from 10 pm to 9 am to prevent any children from getting in the pool. The assistant manager testified there was a camera on the pool gate and there was a video of the incident. The video was lost or destroyed by the manager. The manager and a former employee testified they were falsifying safety documents and not complying with the hotel rules regarding the pool gate being locked and closed. The manager admitted he did not comply with the hotel policy to be CPR certified.
The father testified that he was primarily at fault, but that he expected the hotel to keep the pool gate closed and locked at that time of day.
Plaintiffs' experts testified that the children had some mild cognitive issues caused by the drowning. Plaintiff introduced a $13 million life care plan for each child and asked for over $26 million in damages.
Some doctors opined that the children suffered no permanent damage. Doctors at UMC performed and IME and testified that the children had the same issues before the incident as after. The kids are both in school seem ok.
The Verdict
At trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the Plaintiffs and found the Defendants to be 85% liable and the Plaintiffs’ parents 15% liable. The jury awarded the girl $3,868,525.46 in total damages, the boy $1,645,852.67 in damages, and the father $100,000.00 in damages, for a total of $5,614,378.13.
Here is the breakdown of the verdict:
a. Plaintiff Baby Jane Doe
1) $93,525.46 for past medical expenses
2) $3,500,000.00 for future medical expenses
3) $75,000.00 for pain and suffering
4) $200,000.00 for lost wages
TOTAL: $3,868,525.46
b. Plaintiff Baby John Doe
1) $45,852.67 for past medical expenses
2) $1,500,000.00 for future medical expenses
3) $25,000.00 for pain and suffering
4) $75,000.00 for future lost wages
TOTAL: $1,645,852.67
The verdict will be reduced by 15% to factor in the father's apportioned fault. That will reduce the verdict to $4,772,221.41.
My Take
It was a dangerous case and the defendant probably offered a significant sum to settle before the trial. Ogden is rumored to be rejecting significant settlement offers in the cases that he is taking to trial.
It was a large verdict, but not unreasonable if the jury accepted plaintiff's expert testimony on damages. A lot of people will criticize the father only being apportioned 15% of the fault. Although I understand that criticism, apportionment of fault is a classic jury question.
The vast majority of the verdict was for economic damages and the verdict is not subject to the tort reform caps on non-economic damages.
The Supreme Court will obviously take a hard look at this case on appeal. I do not know anything about evidentiary or jury instruction issues that often lead to a verdict being reversed and remanded for a new trial. Ogden has a lot of verdicts going up on appeal and it will be interesting to see what the Court does with them.
The sources of the information in this post were Ashley Ogden and courtroom observers. As always, I welcome input from others and will post any additional information that I receive.
