How do lawyers put a dollar amount on pain that does not come with a receipt? One method is a per diem argument, which asks a jury to value pain and suffering one day at a time and then multiply that daily amount by the number of days the person is expected to endure the harm. For example, a lawyer might suggest a daily figure for physical pain, emotional distress, or loss of normal life and use that math to propose non-economic damages. It is an argument, not a fixed rule, and juries are not required to accept it.

This can matter a lot in an injury case because breaking suffering into days can make a large damages request sound more reasonable than one big number. That can help show the real human cost of a crash, a bad fall, or a crushing truck injury. But it can also be used to inflate numbers if the daily rate or time period is not tied to the evidence, medical records, or likely recovery timeline.

In Idaho, any damages award can also be reduced under the state's modified comparative fault rule, Idaho Code section 6-801. If the injured person is found 50% or more at fault, there is no recovery at all. So even a strong per diem argument can fall apart if the defense persuades the jury to shift blame, which is a common pressure point in serious road and work-related injury claims.