Loss of enjoyment of life is element of damages separate from pain and suffering

Law Reporter, Jun 2001

Kansas City S. Ry. Co. v. Johnson, __ So. 2d __, No. 1999-CA-00505-SCT, 2001 WL 83928 (Miss. Feb. 1, 2001).

The Mississippi Supreme Court held that loss of enjoyment of life is a separate element of damages from pain and suffering and should be considered on its own merits.

Here, Johnson was badly injured when his car was struck by a train. He and his wife sued the railroad company, and a jury ruled in their favor. Defendant appealed, asserting, among other things, that the trial court erred in allowing recovery of "hedonic" damages, which compensate a plaintiff for loss of enjoyment of life.

Affirming, the state high court said that plaintiffs enjoy the right to damages that will compensate them for all their losses, past and future. Loss of enjoyment of life refers to an injured person's inability to participate in all the activities of daily life that are common to most people, while pain and suffering encompasses the physical and mental discomfort caused by an injury. Each of these types of damages should be fully compensated and considered on their own merits, the court held.

Evidence presented at trial showed that Johnson is no longer able to hunt, fish, or do yard work, and his ability to speak has been diminished substantially He also demonstrated that he is conscious of his lost enjoyment of life's pleasures, the court found. Therefore, an award of damages for lost enjoyment of life was appropriate.

Plaintiffs' Counsel

*Pat M. Barrett, Lexington, Miss.

*Isaac K Byrd Jr., Jackson, Miss.

*Precious Tyrone Martin, Jackson, Miss.

Comment: The South Carolina Supreme Court reached the same conclusion in Boan v. Blackwell, 541 S.E.2d 242 (S.C. 2001), 44 ATLA L. Rep. 93 (Apr. 2001). Leonard J. Spooner, James G. Carpenter, and Jennifer J. Miller, all of Greenville, S.C., represented plaintiff in Boan.