Haarhuis v. CheekÂ, 255 N.C. App. 471

Background

Plaintiff (administrator of decedent Julie Haarhuis's estate) sued Defendant Cheek for wrongful death after Cheek's car crossed the center line at ~6:30 a.m., struck Ms. Haarhuis (a pedestrian), and Ms. Haarhuis later died of her injuries. Parties stipulated Defendant was negligent.
Trial was bifurcated: Phase 1 for compensatory damages; Phase 2 for punitive damages.
Jury awarded $4.25 million in compensatory damages (including pain and suffering) and $45,000 in punitive damages.
Defendant moved for a new trial under Rule 59; trial court denied the motion. Defendant appealed.
Issues on appeal included: voir dire questioning about alcohol and hypothetical questions ("stake out"), jury instructions on pain and suffering, admissibility of non-heir witness testimony on companionship/society, appropriateness of deterrence arguments in compensatory phase, and alleged excessiveness of the compensatory award.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Right to bifurcated trial / voir dire about alcohol	Plaintiff may ask general alcohol-attitude questions to screen jurors because same jury will hear punitive phase	Such questions improperly injected punitive-issue material into compensatory-phase selection and violated bifurcation	Court: General attitude questions about alcohol were permissible; trial court did not abuse discretion
"Stake out" (hypothetical) voir dire questions	Questions were general, probative of juror competence to follow law and assess damages	Many questions were impermissible stake-out hypotheticals that could bias jurors	Court: Most challenged questions were proper or harmless; no prejudicial abuse of discretion in voir dire
Jury instruction on pain and suffering	Evidence (moaning at scene; physician testimony re: painful injuries and response to painful stimuli) supported instruction	No direct evidence decedent experienced conscious pain long enough to justify instruction	Court: Evidence permitted a reasonable inference of conscious pain and suffering; instruction proper
Non-heir witness testimony on companionship/society	Testimony about decedent's personality, companionship, and discovery of pregnancy test was relevant to value of decedent's society	Only heirs may testify about loss of society; non-heir testimony was improper and prejudicial	Court: Such evidence reasonably tends to prove wrongful-death elements and was admissible under statute; no prejudice shown
Deterrence argument in compensatory phase	A deterrence point tied to compensatory purposes (not punishment) is proper	Any deterrence/punitive-theme in compensatory phase violates bifurcation and punitives-only limits	Court: General deterrence tied to compensatory goals is permissible so long as it doesn't urge punishment or rely on statutory aggravating factors
Excessiveness / manifest-weight challenge to $4.25M award	Award reflects evidence of loss and pain; jury has wide latitude in valuing wrongful death	Verdict was excessive and reflected passion/prejudice or double-counting punishment	Court: Trial court did not abuse discretion in denying new trial; damages within jury's reasonable assessment

Key Cases Cited

Worthington v. Bynum, 305 N.C. 478 (review of new-trial ruling limited to manifest abuse of discretion)
State v. Hennis, 323 N.C. 279 (abuse of discretion defined)
State v. Jones, 347 N.C. 193 (entire voir dire reviewed to assess prejudicial error)
State v. Vinson, 287 N.C. 326 ("stake out" hypothetical questions generally improper)
DiDonato v. Wortman, 320 N.C. 423 (wrongful-death damages must be proved with reasonable certainty)
Brown v. Moore, 286 N.C. 664 (jury discretion in valuing wrongful-death damages)