The Verdict Is In – But Is The Damage Award Too High?
By Hannah Catchings and Sean Avocato
Recent Louisiana verdicts have grabbed headlines: $411 million for an injured worker, $170 million for injuries in a plant explosion and $200 million for injuries in a motor vehicle accident. For business owners, these eye-catching numbers raise an important question: If a jury awards massive damages, is there any opportunity to reduce that amount?
The answer can be murky.
Damages Defined: Special vs. General
In personal injury cases, damages broadly fall into two categories: special damages and general damages.
Special damages are tied to measurable financial losses, such as medical expenses, lost wages, and loss of earning capacity.
General damages will compensate subjective damages such as pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and mental anguish. These damages are highly subjective and the primary driver of high damage awards. Because general damages are inherently difficult to value, these awards are often the focus of post-verdict challenges.
Louisiana courts recognize that “reasonable persons frequently disagree about the measure of general damages in a particular case.”[1] While juries are entrusted with wide discretion to determine the amount of general damages, these awards must be reasonably supported by the evidence.
When Can a Damage Award be Reduced?
Louisiana appellate courts do not simply substitute their judgment for that of a jury. Instead, they ask whether the damage award exceeds the jury’s broad discretion under the facts of the case. The Louisiana Supreme Court clarified these rules in 2023 to address the “inherently speculative” nature of general damages and absence of objective guidelines.
Since the Louisiana Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Pete, courts use a two-part review:
- Review the plaintiff’s specific injuries and circumstances and compare them to similar prior cases.
- If the award is not supported by the facts and circumstances of the case and prior similar cases, determine the highest amount that reasonably falls within the jury’s discretion.
Recent Cases Demonstrate the Stakes
Case law surrounding this issue is not a model of clarity. In 2024, the high-profile “Barber Brothers Litigation” emerged wherein a large verdict was addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court twice. The Supreme Court initially reduced several multi-million-dollar general damage awards (some by more than 50%), relying heavily on awards of prior similar cases. This decision seemingly emphasized the objective component of the two-step analysis above. Six months later, the Court reinstated a large $10.75 million general damage award to one plaintiff while increasing the jury’s general damage awards for the plaintiff’s wife and children. This amended decision focused more heavily on the plaintiff’s particular injuries, highlighting the subjective component of the two-step analysis. It also highlighted the ongoing tension between respecting a jury’s verdict and ensuring awards remain within reasonable legal limits.
More recently, in a St. Landry Parish case involving catastrophic injuries from a motor vehicle accident, a Louisiana appellate court reduce a jury’s $155 million general damage award to approximately $40 million, finding such to be the highest reasonable total of general damages. This opinion involved a detailed analysis of the plaintiff’s particular injuries in the case itself and identified the most comparable awards from past cases. The decision illustrates the interplay of both the objective component and the subjective component within the two-step analysis.[2]
Jury Verdicts Continue to Merit Deference But With Limits
Although Louisiana courts give considerable deference to jury verdicts, that deference is not unlimited. When a general damage award lacks adequate evidentiary support and exceeds the jury’s broad discretion, Louisiana law provides meaningful avenues for relief. For businesses facing a significant judgment, early evaluation of the verdict, preservation of appellate issues, and a strategic post-trial approach can help ensure that the jury’s damage award complies with Louisiana law. If you have any questions about these issues, contact Hannah Catchings at hannah.catchings@taylorporter.com or Sean Avocato at sean.avocato@taylorporter.com.
[1] See generally Barber Bros. Contracting Co., LLC v. Capitol City Produce Co., LLC, 2023-00788 (La. 12/19/24), 397 So. 3d 404, 408, reh’g denied, 2023-00788 (La. 2/14/25), 400 So. 3d 918.
[2] Tramble v. Briscoe, 25-423 (La. App. 3 Cir. 07/01/26).
