Blake v. Shellstrom
2012 Ark. App. 28
Ark. Ct. App.2012Background
- Blake sued Shellstrom and Whitten after a May 5, 2008 motor-vehicle collision that damaged Blake's neck.
Trial occurred January 18 and 14, 2011; Blake claimed permanent injuries and lifelong epidural injections, with past medical expenses and lost wages.
- Evidence showed $8,284.85 past medical expenses and $2,089.93 lost wages; life expectancy 31.08 more years; $2,400 per epidural treatment cited for life.
- Before trial, Blake moved to exclude medical-insurance information; no collateral-source instruction was requested or given; case submitted on negligence and general damages verdict form.
- Jury returned verdict in favor of Whitten on negligence, against Shellstrom, with damages of $10,400; Blake moved for new trial based on juror affidavits alleging extraneous information about Blake’s insurance.
- Circuit court denied the motion; Blake timely appealed challenging jury misconduct and the damage award as insufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jury misconduct | Blake argues extraneous information tainted deliberations. | Shellstrom/Whitten contend statements were non-extraneous opinions or undiscoverable; no instruction violation. | No abuse of discretion; affidavits insufficient to show extraneous prejudicial information. |
| Insufficient award | Damages were clearly inadequate given past expenses and future medical needs. | Jury could have assigned portions differently; verdict supported by substantial evidence. | No abuse of discretion; verdict reasonably supported by evidence; affirmed denial of new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Diemer v. Dischler, 313 Ark. 154 (1993) (multifactor abuse-of-discretion standard for jury misconduct)
- Milner v. Luttrell, 2011 Ark. App. 297 (Ark. App. 2011) (collateral-source and damages considerations on appeal)
- Waterfield v. Quimby, 277 Ark. 472 (1982) (context for jury instruction and evidentiary considerations)
- St. Louis Sw. Ry. Co. v. White, 302 Ark. 193 (1990) (juror-related standards and misconduct considerations)
- Borden v. St. Louis Sw. Ry. Co., 287 Ark. 316 (1985) (reliance on jury deliberation and testimony limitations)