(53.) See infra Part IV.B.1 for a discussion of the precedential approach, and infra Part IV.B.5 for a discussion of
hedonic damages.
injuries." (35)
Hedonic damages, they say, reinforce the view that
Recently some state courts, including two district courts of appeal in California, have disapproved the use of
hedonic damages and have ruled that testimony related thereto is inadmissible.
Although
hedonic damages have no basis in economic or accounting theory, they have been erroneously accepted as valid in some jurisdictions.
Few state courts instruct juries on
hedonic damages and the value of life.
Section III examines why
hedonic damages as they are traditionally formulated as a damages concept are not warranted.
Supreme Court held that
hedonic damages are not punitive damages and therefore are not prohibited under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).(18) The Court stated that the availability of such damages under the FTCA is determined by reference to state substantive law.
At that time, a pitched battle was raging over whether benefit-cost analyses of medical treatment should use traditional human capital costs versus values of statistical life derived from willingness to pay concepts (essentially anticipated
hedonic damages).
DAMAGES for the loss of enjoyment of life, known as "
hedonic damages," have received widespread attention and, with justification, have attracted the concern of the defense bar.
Since 1985, and more commonly since 1990, value-of-life estimates have been used to assist juries who are charged with determining awards for the value of the loss of enjoyment of life (so-called
hedonic damages) in both injury and death cases (Smith, 1988).
THE area of
hedonic damages has received a great deal of attention in recent years in both personal injury and wrongful death cases.
Johnson, Paul Taylor and this author [Ireland, Johnson and Taylor, 1997; henceforth IJT] provided a review of reported legal decisions regarding the admissibility of testimony by economic experts on
hedonic damages since the decision of the United States Supreme Court in William Daubert et al v.
