A college who suffered traumatic brain injuries, was awarded almost fifty-million dollars by a jury in California. A collision involving two trucks resulted in catastrophic injuries to the student.

The award is certainly amongst the largest for a sole-plaintiff in Santa Clara in the past 10 years. In fact, it may be the largest of the decade.

What makes this story especially newsworthy is that Santa Clara juries have a reputation for being very conservative and typically not willing to enter such large awards.

While some believe the award will be overturned on appeal, many believe that it will not. This is due largely to the fact that a large portion of the verdict was for damages arising from the plaintiff’s out of pocket expenses.

The incident took place on the Pacheco Pass in May 2007. According the attorney for the plaintiff, two trucks collided at or near the center line. One of the trucks then collided with the plaintiff’s car. As a result of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff, he will now require medical attention at all times of the day for the rest of his life.

The verdict can be broken down as follows: almost three and half million dollars for past medical expenses. Four and a half million for future lost earnings. Thirteen and a half million for general damages. Twenty seven and half million for future medical costs. Joint and several liability was imposed on the defendants for the special damages and several liability for the generals, according to the personal injury lawyer for the plaintiff.

According to the lawyer for the plaintiff, the significance of the size of the award is really a reflection on the high cost of providing medical care to individuals who have suffered traumatic brain injuries. While modern medicine has prosthetic devices for the loss of an arm or a leg, there simply isn’t any replacement for loss of brain function.

Since California is a comparative negligence jurisdiction, the jury apportioned fault among the defendants. The driver striking the plaintiff’s vehicle was found to be 60% at fault. The other driver, and his trucking company, were found to be 35% at fault. Finally, 5% of liability was apportioned to California.

Despite the juries apportionment of 35% of fault to the second truck driver and company, the defendant company maintained that its driver was not at fault at all for this incident.

California had settled with the plaintiff for $10 million prior to the conclusion of trial, according to an attorney for the state.