Defendants, Discounts, and Damages

Lewis v. Ukran, No. B290128 (D2d4 Jun. 26, 2019)

Interesting question, somewhat procedural. 

Question is: When a damage award includes damages for future injuries such as lost wages or future medical expenses, who bears the burden of justifying a reduction to present value? State law is silent on the issue, and federal courts are split. The court here decides that the burden should fall on the party that wants to alter the status quo from the face value of the verdict. So a defendant seeking a reduction based on a discount factor bears the burden of production and proof to establish present value. But in the event that inflation ever becomes an issue again, a plaintiff seeking to increase an award to offset future inflation would bear that burden. Here, neither party put in any evidence on discount. So in the absence of that, the trier of fact was neither required nor permitted to discount the future award to current value.

Affirmed.