In the wee hours of a November night in the heart of a major city in Massachusetts, a City Fire Department Engine runs through a red light, violently collides with a vehicle heading through the intersection with a green light, and crashes into/comes to rest inside a bank. The operator of the vehicle with the green light is off-duty police officer, Robert Fields, who was on his way home from work. The collision with the fire engine redirects Mr. Fields’ vehicle across the road into a tree. The force of the impact knocks Officer Fields unconscious, lacerates his head, and fractures his nose. EMT’s intubate Mr. Fields and transport him to the ER where surgeons insert a valve into his head to relieve the pressure of bilateral intraparenchymal hemorrhages (i.e. brain tissue bleeding).
A few days later, Mr. Fields regained consciousness. About a week after that, he was transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation hospital for physical, occupational and speech therapy. He was finally discharged home about a week later; however, there was nearly nine months of work disability and over a year of therapy to come. Mr. Fields and his wife, Deanna, hired me to pursue their injury and loss of consortium claims against the City. With Mr. Fields’ medical bills and lost earnings alone exceeding $250,000, clearly, the damages here were quite high. There was a problem, though. Under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act, no public employer can be held liable for any amount of damages caused by the employee over $100,000.
The City took its time and then some to review Mr. Fields’ claim – so much so that we filed a lawsuit to put some pressure on the City. And the City made an initial, low-ball offer of $50,000 because of some evidence indicating Mr. Fields was driving over the posted speed limit. The Fields quickly declined the offer , and the City ultimately offered the $100,000 liability cap. Still, a question remained. Was Mrs. Fields’ loss of consortium claim derivative of her husband’s injury claim in the context of the Mass Tort Claims Act? After all, had Mr. Fields been hit by a private citizen’s Honda Civic with $100,000 of liability coverage, Mrs. Fields’ loss of consortium claim would be derivative, or part of, her husband’s injury claim such that their claims together would be limited to $100,000. Was the same true, though, for their claims against the City? The answer is a resounding NO. In fact, Massachusetts case law is clear that, in the context of the Mass Tort Claims Act where the injury is caused by a public employee, a “claim for loss of consortium is independent of the damage claim of the injured spouse” Eyssi v. City of Lawrence, 416 Mass. 194, 203, 618 N.E.2d 1358, 1363 (1993). Once the City’s law department was unable to find any case law to the contrary, it was forced to negotiate with the Fields, who agreed to settle their claims for a total of $150,000.
If you have been injured, contact one of our experienced Massachusetts personal injury lawyers. We handle cases on a contingent fee basis, which means no money is owed unless we are successful in collecting money compensation on the case. Contact us now for a free and confidential consultation by calling 508-543-3700 or visit us at ballinlaw.com
