Holden v.

Wal-Mart Questions

What are the relevant facts of this case?

Holden (Appellant) fell after stepping in a hole in a Walmart parking lot, July 1992.
Holden appealing because did not feel $6000 ($3600) was enough.
Holden issued a handicapped parking permit prior to the fall(June 2, 1992). Had prior problems.
She noticed immediate pain after fallinng, the wort of which was in the right knee.
The cause of the fall was foot twisting in the hole.
Dr. Diane Gilles, orthopedic surgeon, testified she could have waited 5-10 years before knee
replacement had she not fallen and increased lower limb impairment. Charged $646.75.
Dr. McFerran (Jan 10, 1994) performed total knee replacement.
Dr. McFerran testified that the fall hastened the need to have knee replaced.
Total charges $24,707.91.
Hardware had lifespan of 15-20 years. After which another replacement. $40k-50k.

Jury determined total damages to be $6000 and 60% negligence on part of Walmart.
On appeal Holden claims jury made a mistake in computation of damages.

What were the plaintiff's medical expenses related to the knee replacement surgery?

$24,707.91

How much did the jury award the plaintiff for the injury caused by the defendant's negligence?

60% of 6000 or $3600

What is the standard to determine whether an award of damages is not enough (inadequate) or too
much (excessive)?

It is so excessive or inadequate as to be the result of passion, prejudice, mistake, or some other

means not apparent in the record. If an award of damages shocks the conscience it meets the above
criteria.

Why did the appellate court rule that the jury's damage award was not inadequate?

Evidence that showed previous problems with her right knee. Conflicting evidence regarding the
effect of the fall on the preexisting condition. Unclear when the knee replacement surgery would
have taken place regardless of the fall.