Largest 1994 Illinois Jury Verdict. Defense has Appealed

United Airlines $28.2 million

Levenberg v. McDonnell Douglas et al. 93L-4325.

Possible award with damage cap: $4.7 million - $4.2 million past and future medical expenses, plus $500,000 for non-economic damages. This could increase by $500,000 in non-economic damages if Levenberg and her husband's estate are considered separate plaintiffs under the statute.

Pro-cap argument: Personal injury attorneys with sympathetic plaintiffs can extract unreasonable cash awards from businesses.

Anti-cap argument: The tort system allows a disabled 70-year-old woman to take on and beat giant corporations who injure her.

This is the main case damage cap proponents cite in arguing that jury verdicts have risen far beyond the bounds of reason.

Doris Levenberg, 70, suffered broken bones, brain and spinal cord damage and her husband was killed in the July 19, 1989, United Airlines crash at Sioux City, Iowa.

Levenberg's attorney, Robert Clifford of The Clifford Law Offices , sought compensation for, among other things, the terror and mental suffering the pair endured after the airplane's mechanical failure but before the crash.

Jurors awarded Levenberg and her late husband's estate $8 million past pain and suffering; $8 million future pain and suffering; $3.3 million future medical expenses; $2.5 million disability; $1.5 million disfigurement; $900,000 past medical expenses; $3 million wrongful death; and $1 million mental suffering.

"United Airlines can't afford verdicts like that, let alone small manufacturers, small businesses," said Robert Austin, chairman of Lord, Bissell & Brook's medical malpractice section. "Those kinds of verdicts are going to bankrupt the system."

"I don't think the system can stand repeated high verdicts like that," agreed William V. Johnson of Johnson & Bell.

"Caps certainly would have restricted the recovery in this case," said United's defense attorney, John W. Adler of Adler Kaplan & Begy. He had suggested $4.7 million to jurors.

While not endorsing damage caps, Adler questions the plaintiff bar's contention that caps would prevent injury victims from winning enough money to live comfortably with their newfound disabilities.

"There are certainly cases where that argument could be made, but to suggest that a 70-year-old woman couldn't survive the rest of her life comfortably on $5 million surprises me," Adler said.

Levenberg waits to be paid while the defense seeks a new trial. Clifford comments, "These cases are all settled for some lesser amount or reduced on appeal."