In Reply to: Re: OT - no z3 - help required from US lawyer posted by Jayhox on October 23, 2000 at 10:41:14:
Well, his pain and suffering gets him something. While the insurance company is paying the medical bills, he said nothing about them compensating him for pain and suffering. The only problem is, a jury is not likely to give a lot of money for a cut and some headaches.
If he proved that it was done intentionally, then he would likely lose any applicable insurance coverage as the insurance policy in question most certainly carries an exclusion for intentional conduct (and the taxi company would likely argue that the cab driver was operating outside the scope of his employment). So, he might be able to get punitive damages (I say "might" because that is a tough proposition), but only against the cab driver, who probably doesn't have a lot of assets to go after.
But, long story short, his pain and suffering is compensable, he does not need to have lost income or loss of earning capacity to recover. Now if he did have lost income or loss of earning capacity, that would certainly make the claim worth more, but I still think this is claim, given the distance, would not be worth the bother.
And I again close with the admonition that I AM NOT RENDERING LEGAL ADVICE, I am only discussing a legal hypothetical with some friends. So don't sue me!