holding that trial court’s awards of $1,500 to $3,500 to plaintiffs exposed to a chemical leak were a clear abuse of discretion given that the "damages proven, such as eye, nose, and throat irritations, are not unlike the symptoms suffered by persons afflicted with common seasonal allergies ... [and] might be characterized as mere annoyances”; reducing damages to $100 to $500
How later courts described this case
- holding that trial court’s awards of $1,500 to $3,500 to plaintiffs exposed to a chemical leak were a clear abuse of discretion given that the "damages proven, such as eye, nose, and throat irritations, are not unlike the symptoms suffered by persons afflicted with common seasonal allergies ... [and] might be characterized as mere annoyances”; reducing damages to $100 to $500
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JOHNSON, Justice,
dissents.
| , Finding no manifest error, I would affirm the decision of the court of appeal.