Mark Hagen, Gina Hagen v. Fox Nutrition Inc.
Published: Apr. 12, 2005 | Result Date: Aug. 26, 2004 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: PC031349 Verdict – $6,900,000
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
John E. Tiedt
(Tiedt & Hurd)
Defendant
Matthew J. Trostler
(Peterson, Poll & Trostler)
Experts
Plaintiff
Kenneth R. Laughery
(technical)
Steven Heymsfield
(medical)
Christine Haller
(medical)
Mario Inchiosa
(technical)
Gene Bruno M.S., C.R.C., C.C.M., C.D.M.S.
(technical)
Ellis Diamond
(medical)
Robert M. Bilder
(medical)
Joyce Elaine Pickersgill
(technical)
Defendant
Dean Weiner
(technical)
Carl J. Abraham
(technical)
Dean C. Delis Ph.D.
(medical)
Mark Liker
(medical)
Steven Shimoyama
(medical)
Ettie Rosenberg
(medical)
Wallace D. Winters
(medical)
Stacey R. Helvin R.N., CLCP
(medical)
Mark Howard Hyman
(medical)
Facts
In January 2002, plaintiff Mark Hagen, a 39-year-old police officer, purchased an ephedra-based energy supplement called Dymetradine Xtreme from defendant Fox Nutrition Inc. He bought the supplement to boost his energy before a workout. The plaintiff claimed that on Feb. 11, 2002, after consuming one or two tablets of the supplement, he suffered a massive cerebellar hemorrhagic stroke.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a demand of $1.6 million; defendant's offer was $1.2 million per policy limits.
Injuries
The plaintiff suffered a massive hemorrhagic stroke and had a suboccipital craniotomy. He was in a coma for several weeks and hospitalized for 45 days. He suffered severe neuropsychological deficits and has had extensive physical and vocational rehabilitation. The plaintiff is permanently disabled from his occupation as a police officer. He requires a wheelchair or walker to ambulate, and has difficulty speaking because of vocal chord spasms. He claimed past medical specials of $84,033, future medical specials and care costs of $2,832,331, past wage loss of $213,510 and future wage loss of $2,189,020. His wife filed a claim for loss of consortium.
Result
The jury found defendant 60 percent negligent and plaintiff Mark Hagen 40 percent negligent because he was taking a prescription drug at the same time he took the supplement. The jury awarded plaintiff $6.9 million. After taking the comparative negligence into consideration, the verdict was reduced to $4.1 million. Plaintiff's wife received no award on her loss of consortium claim.
Deliberation
1.5 days
Poll
12-0 (strict liability), 12-0 (negligence), 11-1 (breach of warranty of fitness), 11-1 (failure to warn)
Length
two weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390