951 N.E.2d 1
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- Szymczak, stopped at a traffic light in St. Joseph County, was rear-ended by Carter, causing injuries to her neck, shoulders, and wrists.
- Carter died before trial; the Estate was substituted as defendant.
- Officer Wigfall investigated; Carter claimed she changed lanes to avoid a suddenly stopped vehicle, but no other witness corroborated this and there were no skid marks.
- Szymczak sought to introduce impairment evidence based on AMA Guides to quantify whole body impairment (PPI) at 6%; the Estate moved to exclude related impairment-benefit testimony.
- Trial court denied the Estate’s Rule 50 motion for judgment on the evidence; the jury awarded Szymczak $125,000.
- Estate appeals on sufficiency of evidence and evidentiary rulings regarding PPI and workers' compensation schedule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of negligence. | Carter breached duty by unsafe lane change causing collision. | No direct evidence of negligence; rear-end collision does not presume fault; evidence insufficient. | Judgment on the evidence proper; substantial evidence supports negligence inference. |
| Whether evidentiary rulings admitting PPI evidence and excluding the workers' comp schedule denied a fair trial. | PPI evidence is admissible to prove permanent impairment; comp schedule should be considered. | PPI within worker's comp context; comp schedule is irrelevant to tort damages; risk of prejudice. | Evidentiary rulings not an abuse of discretion; PPI relevant to impairment, comp schedule irrelevant to tort damages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Foddrill v. Crane, 894 N.E.2d 1070 (Ind.Ct.App.2008) (mere possibility not enough; breach of duty may be inferred from rear-end collision with stationary victim)
- Haidri v. Egolf, 430 N.E.2d 429 (Ind.Ct.App.1982) (rear-end collision does not raise presumption of negligence without special circumstances)
- Schultz v. Hodus, 535 N.E.2d 1235 (Ind.Ct.App.1989) (duty to maintain look-out; impossible standards not required)
- Bader v. Johnson, 732 N.E.2d 1212 (Ind.2000) (damages in negligence actions recoverable for proximate harm)
- Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty P.C. v. Indiana Ins. Co., 729 N.E.2d 117 (Ind.2000) (workers' compensation system does not guarantee full civil recovery)
- East Chicago Police Dept. v. Bynum, 826 N.E.2d 22 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (standard for reviewing trial court rulings on motions for judgment on the evidence)