Glenn Patrick and Karen Patrick VS State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and Mary Wisdom
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2009 CA 2021 GLENN PATRICK AND KAREN PATRICK VERSUS STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY and MARY WISDOM 01 Judgment rendered MAY 7 2010 On Appeal from the 18 Judicial District Court Parish of Iberville State of Louisiana Suit Number 57345 Division C The Honorable Alvin Batiste Jr Judge Presiding Brian L Williams Counsel for PlaintiffAppellee Baton Rouge LA Glenn Patrick and Karen Patrick Timothy E Pujol Counsel for DefendantAppellant Barbara I Messina State Farm Automobile Insurance Gonzales LA Company BEFORE DOWNING GAIDRY AND McCLENDON JJ We 0I T 3 1 A 4ctjgS Gv i 14 R 6 f sarus DOWNING J The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court was clearly wrong or abused its discretion in awarding damages including those for loss of enjoyment of life to plaintiff for the injuries he sustained in an automobile accident While plaintiffappellee answered the appeal requesting various adjustments in the damage award those adjustments were contingent upon this court decreasing the damages awarded at trial The issues presented in the answer to appeal and discussion thereof are pretermitted since we are affirming the trial court judgment The allegations in defendant assignments of error involve credibility s determinations made by the trial court and expressed in its wellwritten extensive reasons Here the trial court found as a fact that plaintiff was treated for cervical strain and rotator cuff contusion It also found as a fact that plaintiff aggravated an old injury to his left foot The trial court found based upon expert testimony that these injuries were the result of the automobile accident in question In the assessment of damages much discretion must be left to the trier of fact LSA C art 2324 Ryan v Zurich American Insurance Company 07 1 2312 p 7 La 7 988 So 214 219 A court of appeal may not set aside a 08 1 2d trial court findings of fact unless it is clearly wrong s Id Moreover the Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled that whether or not loss of enjoyment of life is recoverable depends on the particular facts of the case and should be left to the district court discretion on a caseby case basis Magee v A C and S Inc 05 s 1036 p 12 La 7 933 So 770 779 06 10 2d Plaintiff testified that since his accident he can no longer participate in the field work aspect of his job as a machinist He also testified that his injuries have seriously curtailed his games of golf and tennis as well as his fishing and boxing hobbies He also said that he no longer has the ability to restore old motor vehicles a pursuit he very much 2 enjoyed We therefore conclude that the trial court had a reasonable basis to compensate plaintiff for his loss of enjoyment of life Accordingly we affirm the judgment of the trial court The costs of this appeal are assessed to the appellant State Farm Mutual Automobile defendant Insurance Company AFFIRMED 3 STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2009 CA 2021 GLENN PATRICK AND KAREN PATRICK VERSUS G STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANT AND MARY WISDOM McCLENDON 7 concurs and assigns reasons The standard of review applicable to a general damages award is the abuse of discretion standard The trier of fact is afforded much discretion in assessing the facts and rendering an award because it is in the best position to evaluate witness credibility and see the evidence firsthand Bouquet v Wal Mart Stores Inc 080309 p 4 La 4 979 So 456 459 08 2d The discretion vested in the trier of fact in fashioning an award of general damages is great and even vast so that an appellate court should rarely disturb an award of general damages Reasonable persons frequently disagree about the measure of general damages in a particular case It is only when the award is in either direction beyond that which a reasonable trier of fact could assess for the effects of the particular injury to the particular plaintiff under the particular circumstances that the appellate court should increase or reduce the award Youn v Maritime Overseas Corp 623 So 1257 1261 La 1993 cert 2d denied 510 U 1114 114 S 1059 127 L 379 1994 S Ct 2d Ed While I would have awarded a lower amount for general damages had I been sitting as the trier of fact and while I consider the general damages award in this matter to be at the very high end of the award spectrum I cannot say that the trial court abused its vast discretion Therefore I respectfully concur
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
