The plaintiff alleged that the decedent and his family were a special family that could clearly and movingly articulate their losses. The plaintiff wife submitted compelling evidence of the decedent's love, affection, comfort, consortium, guidance, support, counsel and companionship during the couple's 42-year marriage. The plaintiff was employed as the breadwinner during much of the parties' married life and the plaintiff had just started a new job as assistant principal at a middle school. The decedent did not work at the time of the collision, but testimony demonstrated that he was an expert gardener who maintained a self-sustaining organic garden for the family. Evidence was presented that he raised poultry, was a mechanic, electrician, plumber and carpenter for the family. There was evidence presented regarding the decedent's relationship with his children which was a very strong bond considering that he was for the most part a stay-at-home dad while the children were growing and even as adults they were very close to their father and suffered a loss as a result of his death.

According to the plaintiff's counsel, a challenge was the fact that the plaintiff had to acknowledge that there was little Vermont precedent reported on similar wrongful death cases with admitted liability. The cases that were reported were quite modest in monetary value compared with the damages that the plaintiff was looking to recoup on behalf of herself and her children. Plaintiff's counsel reported that the confidentiality of prior Vermont settlements hampered settlement discussions to resolve the matter in a manner suitable to the plaintiff.