This article discusses a critical distinction between the amount of damages and the existence of damages under Alabama law. The artcile explains how this distinction can be used to a plaintiff's advantage in a motion for summary judgment in an Alabama personal injury case. Specifically, the distinction may allow an injured individual to obtain a judgment as a matter of law that he or she is entitled to damages, leaving only the amount of damages to a jury.
When representing individuals injured in accident, whether a motor vehicle collision or a workplace accident, many attorneys fail to utilize the summary judgment provisions of Alabama Rule of Civil Procedure 56, to their advantage. Defendants and their attorneys routinely file for summary judgment prior to trial. Historically, plaintiff attorneys rarely moved for summary judgment and only refuted a defendant’s motion. When trial attorneys did move for summary judgment, it was usually limited to the issues of duty and breach.
Limiting summary judgment motions to the issues of duty and liability may be due to a widespread misconception that damages in a personal injury case are a questi
on of fact and automatically reserved for the jury. Such misconception fails to distinguish between the amount of damages and the existence of damages.
When an individual suffers an objective injury, the existence of damages is present. The only question of fact is the extent or amount of those damages. Therefore, when applicable, motions of summary judgment should recognize this distinction and include a request for a ruling as to the existence of damages, reserving only the amount of damages for the jury.
Alabama courts have recognized the clear distinction between the existence of damages and the amount of damages. For instance, in Ex parte Waples, 781 So. 2d 179, 181 (Ala. 2000), the Alabama Supreme Court noted that “a reasonable jury could have only concluded that [the plaintiff] suffered some personal injury and economic loss” when she complained of back and neck pain and sought emergency treatment immediately after a rear-end collision. The case was then remanded to the jury only to determine the amount of damages.
Although somewhat limited to clear-cut liability cases, recognizing the crucial distinction between the existence and amount of damages may have profound effects on your client’s Alabama personal injury claim. For instance, if favorable summary judgment is granted regarding liability and the existence of damages, a trial is only necessary to determine the amount of damages. Such a ruling would mandate that the jury must award some damages for the injured plaintiff. Thus, the personal injury victim would be more likely to obtain a favorable settlement, or, at least obtain their damages “proven” at trial.
