$1.6 million “due to phobia of frogs”? No, probably not

by Walter Olson on April 9, 2013

Readers have been sending clips like this about a recent award to a Buffalo-area landowner whose property was inadvertently flooded by a neighboring developer. But this longer Associated Press report gives some context:

Lawyers on both sides said Monday that Marinaccio’s frog testimony amounted to just moments of a more than three-week trial — and may not have affected the jury’s award. The Court of Appeals, however, referred to it in a five-page decision in which it determined that while Marinaccio had been wronged, the developer hadn’t acted maliciously.

Sometimes a colorful detail is just a colorful detail.

{ 4 comments }

1 Richard Nieporent 04.09.13 at 9:54 pm

A developer working for the town diverted the water from one of their properties and it accidentally turned Marinaccio’s property into wetlands, WTOP reports.

If he thinks he has problems now, wait until the EPA finds out that his property is a wetland.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/story/2012-01-09/epa-wetlands-scotus-court/52471646/1

2 Bumper 04.09.13 at 11:49 pm

Mon Dieu, un peu de beurre, de l’ail, un peu de sel, un peu de poivre, magnifique!

3 Ron Miller 04.10.13 at 10:05 am

I wrote a blog post about this yesterday crying for context.

http://www.accidentinjurylawyerblog.com/2013/04/fear_of_frogs_16_million_verdi_1.html

Glad to get it here, too.

4 wfjag 04.10.13 at 2:05 pm

@Bumper:
Mon Dieu, un peu de beurre, de l’ail, un peu de sel, un peu de poivre, magnifique!

True, the House Elves of Beaubons would know what to do. But, for those who attended school in the English speaking world, $1.6 Million is the reasonable cost of hiring someone who really knows how to do a Patronis Charm.

.

Comments on this entry are closed.