Loth

Loth v. Truck-A-Way Corp.

Bad Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 8·60 Cal. App. 2d 757·60 Cal. App. 4th 757·70 Cal. Rptr. 2d 571·98 Daily Journal DAR 215
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 1998B106209California5,072 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ortega, J.

In this personal injury lawsuit arising from an automobile accident, the jury awarded the plaintiff substantial general damages, which was not in itself remarkable. What was unusual, however, was plaintiff’s expert economist’s testimony on “hedonic” damages, or damages to compensate for the loss of enjoyment of life. The expert told the jury the baseline value of an average person’s remaining 44-year life expectancy is $2.3 million. He also explained that after adjusting the baseline value to account for the plaintiff’s expected lifespan, the jury could calculate the plaintiff’s hedonic damages by multiplying the percentage of the plaintiff’s disability by the adjusted baseline figure. The admissibility of such testimony appears to be a question of first impression in California.

We conclude the expert’s testimony on hedonic damages was inadmissible as a matter of law and its admission was prejudicial. We reverse the judgment and remand for a new trial on damages.

Factual and Procedural Background

On June 29, 1994, plaintiff Shereen Loth was on a business trip driving north on Interstate 5. Plaintiff’s small car was struck by a 24-wheel tractor-trailer rig owned by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.