 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
"We'd like to think that doctors are somehow immune to the influence of advertising, but turns out they're human after all.
— Debbie C
Drug-Company Association Bans Freebies for Doctors
Bible Professor Will Leave Seminary Instead of Facing Hearing
The faculty member wrote a book expressing the view that human beings shaped the Bible, an idea deemed contrary to the conservative seminary’s faculty oath.
Purdue U. Scientist Appeals Findings of Research Misconduct
Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, a nuclear engineer, challenged a university panel that said he had misled other scientists about his research into nuclear fusion.
Embattled Congressman Calls for Investigation Into His Actions on Behalf of CCNY
Rep. Charles Rangel used Congressional letterhead to seek donations for an academic center bearing his name.
Baylor U. Regents Fire President, Citing Failure to Unite Campus
John M. Lilley, the university’s president since November 2005, had been at the center of several recent controversies.
U. of Texas Investment Directors Vote to Repeal Ethics Rule
Under a proposed rule change, directors would be permitted to invest in the same funds as the University of Texas Investment Management Company.
Closed Out? Norman Finkelstein, Controversial Scholar Denied Tenure, Can't Find a Job. | 104
Group Argues That Out-of-Class Learning Is Domain of Faculty, Not Student Affairs | 92
Is There a 'Growing Backlash' Against the SAT? | 59
College Settles With Instructor Fired for Teaching Adam and Eve as Myth | 54
Fresh Artistic Controversy Hits Yale U. | 52
Athletics
Community Colleges
Government & Politics
Information Technology
International
Money & Management
Northern Illinois
Research & Books
Short Subjects
Students
The Faculty
Prior days' news: By date | Search
This week's print issue
Back issues: By date | Search
May 16, 2008
New York Court Reduces Damages in Suit Against Union College
A Union College alumna who two years ago successfully sued the New York college for $16-million after stepping into an open manhole saw an appeals court slash her award to $4.1-million on Thursday, The Daily Gazette reported.
The alumna, Mary Ann Nolan, was a senior in 2003 when she was injured by falling hip-deep into a manhole whose cover had apparently been moved by a snowplow. She has testified that the injuries have resulted in blood clots in her legs, requiring her to take anticoagulants and making it difficult for her to walk long distances or sit for prolonged periods.
Ms. Nolan’s original award was later reduced to $5.1-million. But on Thursday the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court determined that a payment of $1.5-million for future pain and suffering was excessive. The court reduced Ms. Nolan’s total award to $4.1-million.
“Without diminishing the unpleasantness of plaintiff’s ordeal,” the court ruled, “we find under the circumstances presented that the $1.5-million awarded for future pain and suffering materially deviates from what would be reasonable compensation.” —Paula Wasley
Posted on Friday May 16, 2008 | Permalink |Comments
Previous: Foreign Business Schools Retreating From China
Next: Morehouse College Will Graduate Its First White Valedictorian
Obviously a manhole is no place for a woman.
— original marcii May 16, 06:25 PM #
Although the outcome is terrible for Ms. Nolan, how has society lost sight of the concept of personal responsibility? Shouldn’t Ms. Nolan have a responsibiltity to look where she is walking and avoid an open manhole? I just do not get it; we seem to think someone else is responsible for our own individual actions.
— Al Grant May 19, 08:54 AM #
As both defense and plaintiff personal injury attorneys know, if the manhole opening was “open and obvious” then she probably would not have won her case. The article only said the manhole cover had been moved. Anyone who was not attending the trial can only speculate about how the accident occurred but it is entirely possible that the snow covered manhole cover was knocked ajar by the snow plow and flipped open when she stepped on it. Regardless of how the accident occurred, whatever her “personal responsibility” she has for the accident will be reflected in the verdict as a reduction of the award for her comparative percentage of fault even up to a 99% reduction if that is how the verdict is assessed. What is always interesting is how defendants who are negligent and cause harm frequently try to avoid thier “personal responsiblity” for thier actions that cause harm to someone.
— Bob Hayde May 22, 11:46 AM #