BRENTWOOD, N.H. — In a recent legal decision that has sparked renewed discussion about statutory caps on damages, a New Hampshire Superior Court judge was compelled to drastically reduce a jury’s $38 million award to a mere $475,000 in a case involving severe abuse at the Youth Development Center (YDC). The reduction follows state law limitations, despite the judge’s acknowledgment of a potential miscarriage of justice.
David Meehan, a former ward of the state, had previously testified that he was raped hundreds of times by several staffers over the four years he was held at the YDC. The jury found the state liable and awarded a substantial sum for the egregious violations Meehan suffered, including $18 million for pain and suffering and an additional $20 million in punitive damages, recognizing the state’s malicious and oppressive conduct.
However, despite the jury’s clear intent to provide significant compensation, the legal formality tied the award to a single incident of abuse cited on the juror’s form, triggering a statutory cap that limits the state’s financial liability in such cases. This decision was influenced by a 1985 New Hampshire Supreme Court ruling intended to protect the state’s fiscal resources, which allows damages to be capped to prevent significant impact on governmental services.
Following the verdict, the state’s Department of Justice quickly cited the statutory cap, reducing the potential payout to $475,000. This sudden shift drew immediate outrage from the jury and Meehan’s legal team. The jury foreman even reached out to Meehan’s attorney, expressing regret and confusion over the legal intricacies that led to the reduced award.
Judge Andrew Schulman, who oversaw the case, expressed his despair at the legal constraints preventing a more equitable resolution. His ruling emphasized that while he must adhere to precedent and statutory limitations, doing so sharply conflicted with his sense of justice.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between law and equity, particularly in cases of severe state misconduct. Legal analysts point out that such statutory caps are intended to shield the state from overwhelming financial liability but often do so at the expense of justice for individuals, particularly those who have suffered immense trauma and hardship.
Meehan’s lawyers, Rus Rilee and David Vicinanzo, have vowed to continue fighting the decision, criticizing the state for its lack of accountability and its continued failure to resolve the horrific legacy of abuse within the YDC system effectively. They are planning to file new motions and are prepared for more trials in the upcoming year.
The controversy also casts a light on New Hampshire’s struggle with past abuses at the YDC, with Meehan being just one of over 1,000 survivors seeking justice. Efforts to funnel these cases into a settlement program have met with mixed reactions, given the cap on individual awards at $1.5 million despite already disbursing over $100 million.
As it stands, unless there are further appeals, the reduced compensation amount of approximately $569,000, factoring in accrued interest from when the lawsuit was initially filed in 2020, will be all that Meehan receives. This legal outcome could potentially funnel back to the state Supreme Court for further scrutiny.
Meehan’s case is not only a personal tragedy but a stark reminder of the systemic issues within state-run institutions and the complexities of legal redress in cases of state liability. As this legal battle continues, it exposes the broader implications for how society compensates those harmed by governmental abuse.
This report was generated automatically by Open AI. Details about individuals, events, or other aspects of the story may not be accurate. For corrections, retraction requests, or other inquiries, please contact contact@publiclawlibrary.org.