The state Supreme Court of New Hampshire is slated to hear David Meehan’s appeal concerning a historic $38 million jury award granted to him after a civil trial. The trial addressed the abuse he suffered at the Youth Development Center in the 1990s. Meehan’s case was notably the first among approximately 1,300 potential claims related to alleged decades-long abuses at the youth correctional facility.
In May, the jury found the state fully responsible for Meehan’s traumatic experiences, awarding him $18 million in compensatory damages and an additional $20 million in enhanced compensatory damages. However, controversy has arisen due to the jury’s documentation on its verdict form that acknowledged just a single “incident.” This categorization has sparked extensive legal debate due to New Hampshire’s statutory limits on damages, which cap awards for a single incident at $475,000.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court allowed Meehan’s interlocutory appeal. Also noted in the court’s decision is the potential for mediation as per the issued order. Throughout the four-week trial, testimonies revealed that Meehan was subjected to repeated beatings and rapes at the facility. The state’s defense countered, attributing the misconduct to the independent actions of specific employees rather than state liability.
Following the jury’s verdict, Superior Court Judge Andrew Schulman was compelled to reduce the award to the state-capped amount of $475,000, a decision he described as a “miscarriage of justice” in light of the case’s circumstances. The appeal filed by Meehan’s attorneys challenges the fairness and application of this statutory cap and addresses possible errors in the jury’s verdict form.
The Supreme Court will deliberate on several key legal questions, including whether the damages cap contravenes constitutional provisions when applied to a case where the jury deems state conduct towards an individual as “wanton, malicious, or oppressive.” It will also consider directing a partial retrial or entering a partial judgment that might challenge the veracity of the initial jury’s decision, specifically concerning the number of incidents recorded.
Meehan’s legal team contends that the issues at hand extend beyond a mere monetary award and touch upon fundamental constitutional rights, suggesting that granting state immunity under such grievous circumstances would violate the New Hampshire Constitution’s promise of an accountable government.
This case is poised to set a precedent that could significantly affect other cases involving alleged abuses at the Youth Development Center, potentially reshaping how such claims are treated judicially in New Hampshire.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by OpenAI. Facts, individuals, and specific circumstances described may be inaccurate. Requests for article corrections or retractions can be sent to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.