CompFox AI Summary
Nan J. Hammett and Sherry L. Hammett sued Ed and Sandra Zimmerman for personal injuries sustained in a car accident. A jury found Sandra Zimmerman negligent and awarded medical expenses but no damages for physical pain and mental anguish. The Hammetts appealed, arguing the jury's refusal to award pain and suffering damages was against the evidence. The appellate court, presided over by Justice DAY, reversed and remanded for a new trial for Nan J. Hammett, concluding that objective medical evidence of her injuries mandated an award for pain and suffering. However, the court affirmed the judgment for Sherry L. Hammett, finding her injuries were subjective, thus the jury's decision to award only medical expenses was upheld.
Hammett v. Zimmerman is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Texas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Texas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Nan J. Hammett and Sherry L. Hammett sued Ed and Sandra Zimmerman for personal injuries sustained in a car accident. A jury found Sandra Zimmerman negligent and awarded medical expenses but no damages for physical pain and mental anguish. The Hammetts appealed, arguing the jury's refusal to award pain and suffering damages was against the evidence. The appellate court, presided over by Justice DAY, reversed and remanded for a new trial for Nan J. Hammett, concluding that objective medical evidence of her injuries mandated an award for pain and suffering. However, the court affirmed the judgment for Sherry L. Hammett, finding her injuries were subjective, thus the jury's decision to award only medical expenses was upheld.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.