Ayers v. Ishler
2011 Ohio 4272
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Motor-vehicle collision occurred July 3, 2003 in Delaware, light at Davidson/Route 36-37 was inoperative due to a storm; Ayers, M.D., rear-ended by Ishler.
- Actions: 2005 suit against Ishler and State Auto for negligence and underinsured-motorist benefits; initial suit dismissed without prejudice in 2006 and refiled in 2007.
- Jury trial October 6–9, 2009; verdict for Ayers(s) totaling $12,015 with $7,015 for past medical, $5,000 for past pain and suffering; no damages for future pain, loss of life enjoyment, future medical, or Mr. Ayers’ loss of consortium.
- Judgment entered October 21, 2009; motions for JNOV, new trial, or additur filed November 2, 2009 and refiled October 4, 2010; trial court denied on December 6, 2010.
- Appeal filed by plaintiffs challenging evidentiary rulings, alleged bias-prejudice in jury, and denial of additur/new trial; judgment affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by overruling objection to income question | Ayers argued income evidence created class bias. | Ishler argued evidence admissible to address damages. | No reversible error; no plain error shown; waiver and discretion applied. |
| Whether jury was biased by alleged improper statements | Ayers asserted statements created bias against them. | Ishler asserted statements were non-prejudicial and supported by evidence. | Assign. II overruled; no basis shown for reversal. |
| Whether trial court erred in Civ.R. 35 second IME order | Ayers contends no just cause for second examination. | Second IME necessary to address expert designation changes. | No abuse of discretion; Civ.R. 35 properly applied. |
| Whether damages for future pain, enjoyment of life, and consortium should have been awarded or additur granted | Appellants sought additur/new trial for omitted damages. | Jury verdict adequately supported; weight of evidence favored the verdict. | No manifest weight or error; court did not substitute its judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stores Realty Co. v. Cleveland, 41 Ohio St.2d 41 (Ohio 1975) (waiver rule; appellate review limits on new issues raised on appeal)
- State v. Awan, 22 Ohio St.3d 120 (Ohio 1986) (requirement to object to preserve error; plain error standard)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (definition of abuse of discretion; standard of review)
- Hartman v. State, 93 Ohio St.3d 274 (Ohio 2001) (plain error review and corrective discretion)
- Long v. State, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (Ohio 1978) (abuse of discretion and standards for trial court decisions)