Shawl v. Flowers

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 13, 2004
_______________________ Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
Summary Calendar
No. 03-30465
_______________________
FABIAN SHAWL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MICHAEL FLOWERS, ET AL.,
Defendants,
STEPHANIE FLOWERS; STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.,
improperly referred to as State Farm Insurance Company,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Civil Docket No. 02-CV-1419
_________________________________________________________________
Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This appeal arises out of a jury award for general and
special damages resulting from a car accident in April 2001.
Appellant Fabian Shawl argues that the jury erred by awarding only
$12,000 in general damages for pain and suffering. Shawl made the
same argument before the district court in a Rule 59 motion arguing
for an increase in the general damages awarded by the jury. On
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
April 7, 2003, the district court issued a written order denying
Shawl’s motion for additur. We review a district court’s award of
damages for clear error. See Nichols v. Petroleum Helicopters,
Inc., 17 F.3d 119, 121 (5th Cir. 1994) (“[M]ere disagreement with
the district court's analysis of the record is insufficient . . .
we will not reverse a finding although there is evidence to support
it, unless the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with
the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been
committed.") (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).
After closely reviewing the record below, we find no clear error
and agree with the district court’s well-reasoned resolution of
this matter.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.