We’ve blogged before about the long-running appeal in the Polett v. Public Communications litigation. That’s the case where the plaintiff had knee implant surgery that was so successful she agreed to make a promotional video on behalf of the company – but allegedly reinjured her knee during the making of the video. We pointed out, at the very beginning of our first post, that the plaintiff “frankly, wasn’t all that badly injured” but nonetheless received $27.6 million from a Philadelphia jury.
In the end, that was the reaction of the en banc Pennsylvania Superior Court as well. Last month, in Polett v. Public Communications, Inc., 2016 WL 3154155 (Pa. Super. June 6, 2016), the court (on remand from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court) threw out that whopping verdict because it was just too much money for not enough injury. The court ordered remittitur in an unspecified amount. Id. at
First, a procedural note. Although the latest Polett opinion is from the en banc Superior Court, it is nonetheless unpublished, and thus non-precedential. We’ve often thought that the Superior Court overuses unpublished, non-precedential decisions, but Polett takes things to new heights (or depths). Now, even an en banc decision – which are ordinarily used to overrule prior Superior Court panel decisions – can be unpublished. That’s a first, and we hope, a last.