564 S.W.3d 830
Tex.2018Background
- On Aug. 27, 2012, Mary Turner walked from a sidewalk across a parking lot and into Goldfield Street, where an 18-wheeler driven by James Lundry (employed by JBS Carriers, Inc.) struck and ran over her; she died at the scene; security video recorded the event.
- Turner’s family sued Lundry and JBS for wrongful death and survival damages, alleging Lundry’s negligent driving and JBS’s negligent training/supervision; JBS conceded vicarious liability for Lundry but the jury also found JBS directly negligent.
- JBS/Lundry sought to introduce toxicology, autopsy, prior medical records, and an expert (Dr. Miller) showing Turner had alcohol, cocaine, and oxycodone in her system and diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; the trial court excluded that evidence under Tex. R. Evid. 403.
- The jury found Lundry 50% liable, JBS 30% (including direct negligent-training liability), and Turner 20%; the trial court entered judgment on the verdict and the court of appeals affirmed.
- The Texas Supreme Court reviewed (1) whether exclusion of Turner’s mental-health/substance evidence was an abuse of discretion and harmful, and (2) whether there was legally sufficient evidence to support JBS’s separate direct negligent-training liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Turner’s mental‑health and toxicology evidence | Family: evidence prejudicial to their theory; low probative value; no proof of impairment at the moment | JBS/Lundry: relevant to why Turner walked into roadway; probative on vigilance, judgment, reactions; exclusion unfairly prejudicial | Court held exclusion was error under Tex. R. Evid. 403 and the evidence was not unfairly prejudicial; exclusion probably caused rendition of an improper judgment |
| Harm from exclusion | Family: any error was harmless because video and other testimony supported verdict | JBS/Lundry: exclusion was harmful because evidence was crucial to apportionment and causation | Court held exclusion was harmful (crucial to key issue of Turner’s state of mind and proportionate responsibility) |
| Legal sufficiency of evidence for JBS’s direct negligent‑training claim | Family: evidence JBS’s training manual omitted the front blind spot and Lundry had no training on it; jury could infer lack of training caused the accident | JBS: no evidence training was deficient; no evidence that training would have prevented the accident (no causation) | Court held no evidence supported proximate cause for negligent training; reversed judgment as to JBS’s direct negligence and rendered that claim for plaintiff nothing |
| Effect of JBS’s concession of vicarious liability on submission of direct‑negligence claim | Family: §33.011 requires apportionment of fault among responsible parties; direct liability may be considered despite vicarious liability | JBS: concession of respondeat superior precludes separate direct liability submission | Court did not decide this question; resolved case on lack of causation for the direct‑negligence finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Diamond Offshore Servs. Ltd. v. Williams, 542 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. 2018) (defines "unfair prejudice" under Rule 403 and directs balancing probative value against potential for undue emotional or improper influence)
- PPC Transp. Co. v. Metcalf, 254 S.W.3d 636 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2008) (evidence of alcohol use admissible when probative of vigilance, judgment, and reactions at time of accident)
- Gunn v. McCoy, 554 S.W.3d 645 (Tex. 2018) (harmless‑error test for erroneously excluded evidence: error is harmful if it probably caused rendition of an improper judgment)
- Benoit v. Wilson, 239 S.W.2d 792 (Tex. 1951) (evidence of intoxication is admissible as bearing on contributory negligence and care exercised)
- Waffle House, Inc. v. Williams, 313 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. 2010) (discusses employer‑liability theories and notes unresolved contours of negligent‑hiring/training torts)
- Fifth Club, Inc. v. Ramirez, 196 S.W.3d 788 (Tex. 2006) (requiring proof that employer’s hiring/training negligence proximately caused plaintiff’s injuries)