Fleming v. Dionisio, 317 Conn. 498

Background

On July 5, 2009, Gregory Dionisio’s car crossed the center line and collided with Thomas Fleming’s motorcycle; Fleming died. Dionisio had worked overnight, drank alcohol before driving, and later had a BAC of 0.09 (two hours after the crash); his urine tested positive for stimulant metabolites.
Plaintiff (Janet McCall Fleming, administratrix) alleged negligent and reckless driving and sought compensatory and punitive damages under common law and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-295; defendant admitted negligence but contested the other claims.
The plaintiff’s toxicology expert, Dr. Michael McCabe, testified that Dionisio was in a stimulant “crash phase” (withdrawal-related fatigue/impairment) at the time of the collision and that this contributed to the crash.
The trial court held a Porter (Daubert-style) hearing and excluded testimony tying specific drug ingestion two days earlier to the crash but admitted limited expert testimony about the crash phase generally and its possible effects on attention/alertness for recklessness purposes.
Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff awarding compensatory and punitive damages; defendant appealed raising four evidentiary and trial-evidence rulings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of expert testimony re: stimulant "crash phase" (Porter/Daubert)	McCall Fleming: McCabe’s testimony describes an accepted, peer-reviewed toxicology theory relevant to recklessness and meets Porter reliability and fit.	Dionisio: Methodology unreliable and inapplicable—papers cited are inapposite; expert could not quantify dose/timing/fit to this case.	Court affirmed admission in limited form: Porter factors satisfied and methodology fits enough for jury consideration.
Excluding details of defendant’s criminal probation	McCall Fleming: Specific probation terms were peripheral and not within plaintiff’s personal knowledge; court can limit collateral sentencing detail.	Dionisio: Specific probation conditions are relevant to mitigate punitive damages §14-295 and common-law punitive damages.	Court upheld exclusion as within discretion; general punishment/probation was before jury without detailed terms.
Admission of post-accident conduct (drinking urine, difficulty arousing, inappropriate speech)	McCall Fleming: Post-crash conduct shows consciousness of guilt and bears on intoxication/fatigue—relevant and not unduly prejudicial.	Dionisio: Highly prejudicial and should have been excluded under relevance/prejudice balancing.	Court found the evidence relevant to consciousness of liability and intoxication; probative value outweighed prejudice and defendant had opportunity to explain conduct.
Refusal to strike plaintiff’s testimony about future plans (scholarship/helping daughter)	McCall Fleming: Remarks were generic, not tied to expected verdict amount; court cured with limiting instruction.	Dionisio: Testimony improperly invited sympathy and speculative damages and should be struck.	Court affirmed refusal to strike; instruction given to jury to disregard as to damages, so no abuse of discretion.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Porter, 241 Conn. 57 (Conn. 1997) (adopted Daubert-style gatekeeping factors for scientific expert testimony)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1993) (federal standard for admissibility of expert scientific evidence)
Weaver v. McKnight, 313 Conn. 393 (Conn. 2014) (review标准 for trial court’s admission of expert testimony)
State v. Guilbert, 306 Conn. 218 (Conn. 2012) (discussion of Porter factors and expert methodology assessment)
Maher v. Quest Diagnostics, 269 Conn. 154 (Conn. 2004) (articulation that proponent must explain methodology for court’s gatekeeping)
Reville v. Reville, 312 Conn. 428 (Conn. 2014) (standard for relevance/probative value and trial court discretion)
State v. Saucier, 283 Conn. 207 (Conn. 2007) (trial court discretion in admitting evidence of criminal penalties and relevance)
Batick v. Seymour, 186 Conn. 632 (Conn. 1982) (post-incident conduct admissible to show consciousness of guilt)