A few months ago an appellate court agreed that a Manhattan Supreme Court Justice correctly addressed a gross injustice in a jury verdict that awarded an injured construction worker $4,144,141 for lost earnings and medical expenses but nothing for pain and suffering. This is called an inconsistent verdict. The trial judge upheld the jury verdict and told the defendants that unless they voluntarily agreed to pay the worker an additional $500,000 for past pain and suffering and $500,000 for future pain and suffering, that he would order a new jury trial limited to that issue. The failure of the plaintiff's trial lawyer to object to this inconsistent verdict, before the jury was discharged did not preclude the trial court from setting aside the award of 0 for pain and suffering.
The plaintiff injured his bicep, shoulder, neck and back while moving a pallet of material with a co-worker that weighed between 150-196 pounds.The Manhattan jury agreed that the defendant violated Labor Law Section 240 (1) for failing to provide a hoist so these workers were not put at risk. The plaintiff ruptured a bicep tendon and tore the labrum in his shoulder both of which required surgery to repair. As a result of lifting the heavy pallet, the construction worker also suffered herniated discs in his neck and back. The plaintiff underwent lumbar spinal surgery which failed and he will need another surgery to his lower back. He never returned to the job. Natoli v City of New York, 180 A.D. 3d 477 - February 11, 2020