Licudine

Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

Good Law
2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 803·208 Cal. Rptr. 3d 170·3 Cal. App. 5th 881
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2016B268130California8,099 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hoffstadt, J.

During her senior year of college, plaintiff Dionne Licudine (plaintiff) suffered injury during a gallbladder surgery that will have lifelong repercussions. She sued for malpractice, and sought damages for the resulting diminution in her earning capacity. Before such damages may be awarded, a jury must (1) find the injury that the plaintiff sustained will result in a loss of earning capacity, and (2) assign a value to that loss by comparing what the plaintiff could have earned without the injury to what she can still earn with the injury. (See Fein v. Permanente Medical Group (1985) 38 Cal.3d 137, 153 [ 211 Cal.Rptr. 368 , 695 P.2d 665 ] (Fein); Storrs v. Los Angeles Traction Co. (1901) 134 Cal. 91, 93 [ 66 P. 72 ] (Storrs).) The first threshold requirement is met only if the plaintiff is “reasonably certain to suffer a loss of future earnings.” (Robison v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. (1962) 211 Cal.App.2d 280, 287-288 [ 27 Cal.Rptr. 260 ] (Robison).) But how certain must the jury be in fixing what the plaintiff could have earned without the injury? We know that a jury may not award speculative damages (Ferguson v. Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein (2003) 30 Cal.4th…

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.