|
|
| |
| Wed, Aug. 20, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Appeals court upholds $6.5 million jury award in soldier's death Wednesday, Feb 27, 2008 By Rob Moritz Arkansas News Bureau LITTLE ROCK - The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis on Tuesday upheld a $6.5 million wrongful death award given to the estate of U.S. Army Pvt. Van Ryan Marcum of Prescott, who was accidentally electrocuted in 2004 during a basic training exercise at Fort Benning, Ga. Marcum, 21, was halfway through his 14-week basic infantry training when he leaned against an abandoned metal latrine after an exercise on a firing range. An investigation later found that the latrine, which was insufficiently grounded, had a faulty circuit breaker and a short in the wiring to a fan. When Marcum "sat down and leaned against the building, he completed the circuit and became the ground," the 11-page U.S. appeals court ruling said. Marcum's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against The Shaw Group, Inc., a private contractor in charge of maintenance and repairs at Fort Benning. A jury later returned a verdict against Baton Rouge, La.-based Shaw and awarded Marcum's estate $6.5 million for loss of life, conscious pain and suffering, and mental anguish. In its appeal, Shaw asked for a new trial or a ruling that it was not responsible for the soldier's death. The company argued it was not responsible for demolishing the latrine because the Army had given it an extension for the demolition work, and that U.S. District Judge Harry F. Barnes erred when giving instructions to the jury. In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals disagreed, saying "the evidence did confirm that Shaw was under a duty to repair and maintain the ... latrine, to demolish the latrine, and to demolish the latrine in a timely manner." As for instructing the jury, the court said Barnes "properly instructed the jury on expert testimony and the burden of proof." The evidence "supports the jury verdict that an appreciable risk of harm was foreseeable, including electrocution," the court said in its ruling. "The court did not err in denying Shaw's motions for judgment as a matter of law." |
