Harry E. Fox, of the Estate of Cynthia L. Fox v. Mark P. Rechkemmer and Rechkemmer Ag Enterprises, Inc., 16-0849

Background

On October 12, 2012, Cynthia Fox (driving a TrailBlazer) and Mark Rechkemmer (driving a 20,000 lb TerraGator) collided at an uncontrolled rural intersection; Cynthia died at the scene.
Harry Fox, executor of Cynthia’s estate, sued for wrongful death; case tried to a jury in April 2016.
Competing expert testimony: each side’s expert opined the other vehicle entered the intersection first; Fox’s expert suggested Cynthia slowed and could steer (ABS), defense expert said she did not slow and likely did not see the TerraGator.
Rechkemmer testified he slowed, looked both ways, then accelerated to ~30–35 mph entering the intersection; he survived with injuries.
Jury found both parties negligent, apportioning fault 60% to Cynthia and 40% to Rechkemmer; court dismissed the estate’s wrongful-death claim.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Fox)	Defendant's Argument (Rechkemmer)	Held
Defense opening comment suggesting Cynthia could have steered into a ditch	Comment was an impermissible argumentative assertion likely to cause juror speculation and prejudice	Statement was a permissible preview of defense theory tied to expert testimony; opening statements are not evidence	No reversible error: comment not prejudicial given jury instructions that opening statements are not evidence; no new trial
Exclusion of TerraGator speed-warning sticker and related evidence (seatbelt, slow-moving sign)	Sticker and warnings show defendant’s disregard for safety and are circumstantial evidence of negligence and causation	Evidence is improper character/prior-act evidence used to paint defendant as reckless, irrelevant to the specific negligence issues	Court did not abuse discretion: evidence excluded as improper character evidence and Fox failed to show relevance to the specific negligence issues or causation
Allowing testimony about measurements Rechkemmer took after his deposition (timing acceleration to speed)	Post-deposition measurements were discovery ambush and should have been excluded or sanctioned	Testimony was permissible; any inconsistencies could be used to impeach; no rule cited forbids such testimony	No abuse of discretion: plaintiff offered no authority; impeachment and continuance remedies available; no preserved sanction claim
Admission of evidence that Rechkemmer was not wearing a seatbelt	Evidence should show failure to mitigate damages and reduce sympathy for defendant	Seatbelt evidence is irrelevant to liability here and risks character attacks; some limited use allowed for body movement in cab	No cognizable error: counterclaim for damages was settled; court allowed limited use (body reaction) but barred using seatbelt evidence to show recklessness

Key Cases Cited

Horak v. Argosy Gaming Co., 648 N.W.2d 137 (Iowa 2002) (trial courts have broad discretion on admissibility of evidence)
Johnson v. Knoxville Cmty. Sch. Dist., 570 N.W.2d 633 (Iowa 1997) (reversal only for clear abuse of discretion prejudicing the complaining party)
Kester v. Bruns, 326 N.W.2d 279 (Iowa 1982) (limits on counsel’s opening statements about evidence not in good-faith intended to be offered)
State v. Putman, 848 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2014) (three-step test for admitting prior-bad-acts evidence: relevance to disputed issue, clear proof, probative value vs. unfair prejudice)
State v. Sullivan, 679 N.W.2d 19 (Iowa 2004) (probative value vs. prejudicial effect balancing for bad-acts evidence)
State v. Ondayog, 722 N.W.2d 778 (Iowa 2006) (presumption that juries follow court instructions)
Yost v. Miner, 163 N.W.2d 557 (Iowa 1968) (evidence of intoxication admissible as circumstantial evidence of lack of due care when causally connected)
Spreitzer v. Hawkeye State Bank, 779 N.W.2d 726 (Iowa 2009) (explaining proper use and limits of but-for causation analysis)
Grinnell Coll. v. Osborn, 751 N.W.2d 396 (Iowa 2008) (issues not raised and decided in district court are ordinarily not considered on appeal)

Affirmed.