How Pleadings Are Drafted Can Impact Jury Instructions
Olson v. Darlington Mut. Ins. Co., has made yet another interlocutory trip to the appellate court. This time, the issue was a proposed jury instruction that would have informed the jury that the total damages suffered by the plaintiff did not exceed $75,000. The trial court determined that the instruction was justified because of the allegation in the complaint:
THAT THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES SOUGHT AND IN CONTROVERSY IS LESS THAN THE AMOUNT REQUIRED FOR REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN UNDER DIVERSITY OF CITIZENSHIP PURSUANT TO 28 USC 1332(A).
The appellate court disagreed:
The complaint clearly states Olson is seeking less than $75,000 in damages, not that she has, in fact, suffered less than $75,000 in damages.
The Court analogized the plaintiff’s position to that of a small claims plaintiff who proceeds in small claims court to obtain procedural benefits, even though the amount of damages might exceed the amount a small claims court may award.
Cases like this emphasize the care that must be taken in word and phrase selection in pleadings and briefs. Choosing phrases that don’t say exactly what you want to convey, no more and no less, can come back to haunt you. Of course, even painstaking drafting cannot possibly take into account the endless possible issues that may later arise. If you didn’t believe that writing is one of the most important crafts a lawyer can perfect, this case should convince you.
