Zero dollar jury verdict did not bar plaintiffs’ recovery of
costs, appeals court concludes
Section 814.01(1) does not prevent a plaintiff from obtaining costs
when the recovery is the result of a stipulated amount followed by a
judgment.
By Joe Forward, Legal Writer,
State Bar of Wisconsin
Oct. 24, 2011
– A healthcare provider that admitted some negligence in the death
of a patient – and accepted responsibility for funeral expenses
– could not escape paying the plaintiff’s costs although a
jury awarded zero dollars in damages for pain and suffering.
William Radley Sr. suffered a heart attack and was
hospitalized for several days before being transferred to the Wisconsin
Veterans Home. The discharging hospital physician prescribed
anticoagulants and recommended a daily test to monitor the effects of
the drugs.
At the Wisconsin Veterans Home, a ThedaCare, Inc.
employed physician determined it wasn’t necessary to perform the
daily anticoagulant monitoring test, and the first test was performed
two weeks after Radley was transferred to the Veterans Home.
Two days later, Radley died from excessive blood loss. Radley’s estate filed a medical
malpractice and wrongful death action against ThedaCare, alleging negligence in failing to
properly monitor the anticoagulation medication.
ThedaCare admitted negligence with respect to
its monitoring policies, and accepted responsibility for about $10,000
in funeral expenses.
But ThedaCare disputed the estate’s claim
that Radley suffered pre-death pain and suffering
based on ThedaCare’s negligence, arguing that other factors were
the cause. On this issue, a jury sided with ThedaCare and
awarded nothing in monetary damages.
After trial, ThedaCare objected to the estate’s
request for costs under Wis. Stat. section 814.01(1), which allows a
plaintiff to obtain costs upon a recovery. The statute applies where the
plaintiff prevails in a litigated trial court proceeding.
Finkenbinder v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co., 215 Wis. 2d
145, 572 N.W.2d 501 (Ct. App. 1997).
ThedaCare argued the estate was not a
“prevailing party” because it did not obtain a recovery as a
result of a disputed issue at trial. That is, ThedaCare said the court could not award costs
based on its stipulation to funeral expenses because that was akin to a
settlement.
But in Estate
of William Radley Sr. v. ThedaCare
Inc., 2009AP653 (Oct. 20, 2011), the District IV Wisconsin
Court of Appeals disagreed, concluding the estate was a prevailing party
and obtained a recovery within the meaning of section 814.01(1).
“Nothing in Finkenbinder suggests that we meant that
costs under § 814.01(1) are available to a plaintiff only if the
issue on which the plaintiff prevails in a trial court proceeding is
resolved by a trial,” wrote Judge Paul Higginbotham.
The appeals court explained that the estate made a
“recovery” when the circuit court entered final judgment for
the funeral expenses, regardless of the jury verdict on pain and
suffering.
The court also rejected ThedaCare’s argument that its
stipulations were akin to a settlement, and costs are not recoverable to
claims resolved by stipulation or settlement under Aul v. Golden
Rule Insurance Co., 2007 WI App 165, 304 Wis. 2d 227, 737 N.W.2d
24.
“Nothing in Aul suggests that settlements in general do
not result in a judicial recovery,” Judge Higginbotham explained.
“What is significant in Aul for our purposes here is that
there, the settlement did not result in a recovery in a
judgment.”
Section 814.01(1) does not prevent a plaintiff from obtaining costs
“when the recovery is a result of a stipulation and
judgment,” the court concluded.