Daigi v. South Flordia Water Management District. Page 11, C.S.H.B. No.

787 (2008)

Parties: P- Brian, who is paralyzed from the waist down due to the accident that happened while
riding a bike.

D- Water management district who neglected to put up a warning sign and fence for the drainage
culvert.

Procedural History: an act of relief of Plaintiff by the Defendant for personal injuries that he
suffered due to the negligence of D. D appealed.

Issue: Could negligence be considered a valid cause for tort?

Facts: -The grass was at least above the knee level, and the drainage culvert was completely
obscured.

-Despite having noticed that the security fence hadn’t been set up, the D neglected to erect a
fence.

- P was wearing a helmet and full protective gear.

-His friend who was riding slow on first gear could only stop 2 feet short of the culvert after
braking hard.

-P had a crushed spine fracture and according to an expert, he’ll be in his wheelchair for the rest
of his life.

-His speed was 25.6mi/h, requiring 90 ft to come to a stop.

Arguments:

P- Due to the negligence on the D’s part, he suffered a personal injury that deserves to be
compensated monetarily.

D- P was an invitee (trespasser), since people are required to stay on the road.

Rule: Negligence is a tort.

Holding: D should pay P $4million dollars for the damages to compensate for personal injuries.

Reasoning: D was negligent for not taking precautions.

Comment: - Jury decided the case, judge upheld the decision.

– Legislature had to pass a law for D to pay over $4million, since Florida statute limits the
amount of possible compensation by the government agencies to $200,000.
Holden v. Wal-mart Stores, Page 15, (Neb 2000)

Parties: P- Holden, who went through a knee replacement surgery after falling at Wal-mart
parking lot.

D- Wal-mart

Procedural History: P had sued D for causing her injuries that she experienced by falling into a
big pothole in the parking lot. Lower court decided $6000 to be compensated for P’s injury
caused by D’s negligence. P appealed, arguing that there was an error in calculating the damages.

Facts:

-P has always had a knee problem.

-The accident hastened the knee replacement by 5-10 years.

-She has a handicap permit issued 8 years ago.

-She got a knee replacement surgery after the fall.

-Medical expense = 25,000 dollars.

Issue: Is Walmart responsible for the damages caused by negligence? Is the damage decided by
the jury adequate to compensate P?

Arguments:

P- The medical bill itself was 25,000 dollars.

-The injury caused her pain and she needed assistance after the fall.

Rule: Negligence is a tort.

Holding: Affirmed. The amount of damages decided by the jury holds.

Reasoning: The decision should be made by the jury.