A man was awarded $25 million by a Portsmouth, Virginia jury for his claim that he had been raped by three police officers in South Korea.
It is hard to imagine how awful that would be. Who would take $25 million in exchange for that?
I know who. Norfolk lawyer Daniel R. Warman. A person who can still work and “who can see and has all their arms and legs … that gets $25 million is perfectly ridiculous,” Warman told the Virginian-Pilot.
Interestingly, Warman had a partner in 1994 who does personal injury plaintiffs’ work in medical malpractice and products liability cases.
[H]e mostly does defense work, Warman is not enthusiastic either way about most kinds of “tort reform.” He thinks the main problem with the tort system is the availability of damages for creative new torts and such intangibles as non-physical pain and suffering, which leads to incomprehensibly huge random-number verdicts. In his experience, though, he says juries have been wrong only two or three times, one of which was a case the defendant should have lost.
I would love to hear more about this. I am assuming this guy – a retired Navy Reserve captain which gets some props from me – is a good lawyer and a smart guy. But assuming there is liability – a big if in this case if you read the article – what would be the appropriate damage award for being gang raped by three men? Personally, I’m inclined to defer to the jury that heard the evidence.