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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.