Key Takeaway
Court of Appeals reverses Appellate Division ruling on lost wage claims, finding triable issues of fact exist where lower court deemed claims speculative.
Understanding Lost Wage Claims in Personal Injury Cases
Lost wage claims represent a critical component of personal injury compensation, allowing injured parties to recover income they would have earned but for their injuries. However, these claims often face significant scrutiny from courts and insurance companies, who may argue that future earning potential is too speculative to warrant compensation.
The legal standard requires plaintiffs to demonstrate their lost wages with reasonable certainty, balancing the need for concrete evidence against the inherent uncertainty of predicting future earnings. Courts must carefully distinguish between claims that are genuinely speculative and those that present legitimate questions of fact suitable for jury determination.
The tension between summary judgment motions and jury trials becomes particularly acute in lost wage cases. When appellate courts determine that wage loss claims are “speculative,” they effectively remove these issues from jury consideration. However, as this case demonstrates, the highest court may view such determinations differently, recognizing that establishment of lost wages often involves credibility assessments better suited for trial proceedings.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Freligh v Government Employees Ins. Co., 2017 NY Slip Op 08714 (2017)
“Triable issues of fact exist as to plaintiff’s claim for lost wages. ”
This was the case where the Appellate Division, Third Department went to great pains to show that the Plaintiff’s lost wage claims were the textbook definition of speculative. The dissent argued that these were pure credibility issues being decided on summary judgment motion. The Court of Appeals reversed.
Key Takeaway
The Court of Appeals’ reversal in Freligh highlights the fundamental principle that lost wage determinations often involve credibility assessments and factual disputes that should be resolved by juries rather than judges on summary judgment. This decision reinforces that even seemingly speculative wage claims may present triable issues of fact deserving full consideration at trial.
