$17million verdict: Attorneys Megan Curtis and Paul Applebaum - St. Paul Jury Delivers Wrongful‑Death Verdict in Phanny Phay Civil Case

Link to Pioneer Press article:

https://www.twincities.com/2026/03/02/phanny-phay-st-paul-wrongful-death-lawsuit/

In Memory of Phanny Phay

Attorney Megan Curtis was proud to represent the Phay family alongside Paul Applebaum.

Last week, a Ramsey County jury returned a $17 million verdict in the wrongful‑death case brought by the family of Phanny Phay. For her family, the verdict represented something they had not previously been given in court: the opportunity to tell Phanny’s story and to have a jury assess responsibility and harm under the civil justice system.

Phanny Phay was 28 years old when she was killed in her St. Paul apartment in 2017. Her death led to a criminal case that ultimately concluded with a finding of not guilty by reason of mental illness. While that outcome resulted in psychiatric commitment, it left Phanny’s family without a public accounting of the loss they had suffered. Minnesota law, however, allows families in that position to pursue civil claims for wrongful death—and that is what brought this case to a jury years later.

The civil trial focused on harm, loss, and accountability. Over the course of the proceedings, jurors heard evidence about Phanny’s life, her close relationship with her family, and the future she was building. She was a University of Minnesota graduate, the first in her family to attend college, and she had plans to continue her education and pursue a career in medicine, with a particular interest in caring for children. The evidence also addressed the violence of the attack and the pain and suffering Phanny experienced before her death.

After hearing that evidence, the jury returned a verdict totaling $17 million. The award included damages for Phanny’s pain and suffering, for the loss of guidance, comfort, and companionship suffered by her family, and for future losses resulting from her death.

Civil verdicts cannot undo what happened, and they are not a substitute for criminal proceedings. But they do serve an important and distinct purpose. Civil juries apply a different standard of proof, and they are tasked with evaluating responsibility and harm in a way that centers the injured party and their family. In this case, the jury’s verdict reflected a careful consideration of both the evidence and the magnitude of the loss.

For Phanny’s family, the case was never simply about money. It was about being heard and about having a public forum acknowledge who Phanny was and what her death meant to those who loved her. The verdict represents that acknowledgment.

We are grateful to the jurors who devoted their time and attention to this difficult case, and we are honored to have represented Phanny’s family in seeking accountability through the civil justice system. Cases like this underscore why that system matters—particularly when other avenues cannot fully address the harm that has been done.