How a Columbus, Ga., Jury Returned a $280M Verdict in 45 Minutes
The jury awarded $150 million for the value of the life of Judy Madere, and $30 million for her pain and suffering, plus $100 million in punitive damages and $65,000 in attorney fees.
August 24, 2019 at 06:20 PM
8 minute read
A jury in Columbus, Georgia, returned a $280 million verdict Friday against a trucking company whose driver crossed the center line and killed five members of a family traveling together.
The weeklong trial before Muscogee County State Court Judge Andy Prather was for the death of Judy Madere, 58, who was riding in the backseat of a Nissan Rogue SUV buckled in between her grandchildren, 4-year-old Jaxson and 7-year-old Trinity. Her daughter, Carrie Jones—the children's mother—was driving. Judy Madere's twin sister, Trudy Hebert, was sitting up front next to her niece. They all died when the tractor-trailer carrying a bin of scrap metal came into their lane and hit them head on, according to court records.
The jury awarded $150 million for the value of the life of Judy Madere, and $30 million for her pain and suffering, plus $100 million in punitive damages and $65,000 in attorney fees.
The trucking company, Georgia-based Schnitzer Southeast, admitted liability for the at-fault driver's negligence. The parent company, publicly traded Schnitzer Steel Industries of Portland, Oregon, denied responsibility. But the jury held that the two companies were operating as a joint venture, and that the driver was an agent of both.
"I think the verdict was a reflection of the quality of our client as much as the mean spirited nature of the defense," said Brandon Peak of Butler Wooten & Peak, lead counsel for Judy Madere's husband Larry and surviving daughter Anjanette Thomas. "Not a single time did the defense apologize for the wreck or for taking Judy Madere's life. Not a single time."
Peak said a low point was when the lead defense counsel suggested in closing that Carrie Jones, Judy Madere's daughter, could have done more to get out of the truck's way. "The jury was visibly repulsed by that," Peak said.
Peak tried the case with partner Joel Wooten. The winning team also included: LaRae Dixon Moore of Page Scrantom Sprouse Tucker & Ford in Columbus; Chris McDaniel and Ramsey Prather of Butler Wooten & Peak; paralegal Marci Martinez; IT specialist Ray Davis; investigators Nick Giles and AB Calhoun; and legal assistants Heather Byrd and Ginger Busby. Butler Wooten & Peak has offices in Columbus, Atlanta and Savannah.
The jury had a verdict after about 45 minutes of deliberation, Wooten said.
"It's a horror story," Wooten said. "It's a family's worst nightmare."
Peak and Wooten represent the survivors not only of Judy Madere but the four others killed along with her. They said Saturday that one case is still pending in Muscogee County Superior Court. That one is for Madere's twin sister. The others for the children and their mother have been resolved with confidential settlements.
Wooten said Peak handled the opening statement and closing argument, plus most everything else. "He is a great young lawyer and a great person," Wooten said of Peak. "He did a wonderful job."
Peak said he was "thankful and appreciative of the jurors who gave meaning to Judy's life and recognized that it is not OK for a large corporation to ignore safety rules and put unsafe trucks and unsafe drivers on the roadway."
The family's lawyers presented evidence to show braking skid marks for the SUV but none for the truck. And they alleged that the companies were linked so closely that when the driver applied for his job with Schnitzer Southeast, he filled out an application to Schnitzer Steel.
Schnitzer's lead counsel was Bobby Shannon of Baker Donelson. His team included Mark Barber and Ciera Locklair of Baker Donelson. Also present at the defense table was appellate attorney Laurie Webb Daniel of Holland & Knight.
"Schnitzer plans to appeal because we believe that the trial was riddled with error," Daniel said Saturday.
Peak disagreed, saying, "We don't think there are any errors whatsoever. Judge Prather tried a clean case."
Shannon said there's more to the story than what the jury knew.
"We certainly understand the anger of the jury," Shannon said Sunday. "In post-trial discussions with jurors, they felt that we never took responsibilities or apologized for the accident. That was inaccurate. We tried to apologize after the accident. We were rebuffed. Counsel for the plaintiffs moved to exclude any apologies during the trial."
Shannon expressed frustration over his client being accused of putting a fatigued driver on the road. "The driver was on vacation for four days prior," Shannon said. "The morning of the accident was his first day back at work."
Shannon said the verdict was used in a symbolic way for more than this case at hand.
"They also wanted to send us a message to deter my client's behavior. We were precluded from talking about the significant changes Schnitzer put into place after the accident. Also, they heard lots of evidence about the loss of five family members. Plaintiff's Counsel told the jurors in closing this was the only trial. They weren't told there were five separate suits or three of the five cases were settled–two of them settled almost a year ago."
And Shannon said he believes jurors were biased by local news coverage of the trial. "In addition, I believe the nightly television broadcast that contained inflammatory inaccuracies impacted the jury," he said.
A corporate contact for Schnitzer Steel sent the Daily Report a statement Saturday, attributable to Schnitzer Southeast.
"We continue to extend our deepest condolences to all affected by this tragic accident that occurred in 2016. Schnitzer Southeast has accepted responsibility for this accident, and we were hoping for a fair and reasonable outcome for all parties. Unfortunately, we believe the jury's verdict has significant flaws, and we plan to appeal it," the company said.
"Operational safety is a core value for Schnitzer Steel and each of its subsidiaries, and we work every day to ensure a safe working environment for our employees and the communities we serve. Working with Schnitzer Steel, we review our safety policies and procedures on an ongoing basis to minimize the risk of accidents of any type going forward. Our safety and logistics practices and procedures include transportation safety management, including process review to ensure compliance with safety guidelines, partnerships with local law enforcement to provide enhanced training for drivers, and installation of dashboard cameras in all of our vehicles," the company said.
In a summary for the consolidated pretrial order, the defense said the driver swerved to miss a dog.
But Wooten said said no one else saw a dog in the road July 18, 2016.
The Madere attorneys alleged the driver was fatigued, having only slept less than five hours the night before. They said he fell asleep, crossed the center line of the two-lane U.S. Highway 80 in Alabama just outside of Columbus and slammed into the SUV.
Wooten said the trial was so emotional that he was crying.
"Judy was described as the rock of the family, the matriarch. She and Larry raised their two girls to do right and study hard," Wooten said. "They always tried to do the right thing."
Judy and Larry Madere had been married for 42 years. Testimony included their first meeting at a high school dance, Wooten said. Larry Madere saw her and asked the boy next to him, "Who is that girl?"
"She's my girlfriend," the other boy said.
"I want to dance with her," Larry Madere said.
"That'll be a dollar a dance," the boy joked.
Larry Madere answered, "Here's $5. I'm gonna dance with her all night."
Wooten said he thought the testimony of a co-worker from the school cafeteria was particularly moving. She said Larry Madere drove Judy Madere to work every day, even though they only lived a short distance from the school. "I've been there," Wooten said. "You could walk it easily."
"Judy like powdered sugar donuts," Wooten said. "Larry would send her a bag of powdered donuts with a love note inside."
Wooten said he thought the defense miscalculated when one of their attorneys asked Larry Madere how much longer he thought Judy Madere would have worked.
"It's not about the paycheck. It's all about the intangible things people do," Wooten said. "Apparently the jury agreed."
The case is Madere v. Schnitzer, No. SC17CV106.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAkerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readWoman's Suit Alleging Negligence to Sex Trafficking by Hotel Tossed by Federal Judge
Supreme Court of Georgia Accepts 2 Petitions for Voluntary Discipline With 2-Year Suspension, 1 Voluntary Surrender of License
Trending Stories
- 1'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
- 2NY District Attorneys Are Still No Fans of Revamped Misconduct Watchdog
- 3ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Over Alleged War Crimes in Gaza
- 4Attorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
- 5Attracted to Thompson Hine's Fee Flexibility, Morgan Lewis Litigator Switches Firms in Chicago
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250