Jeffrey Lockhart v. United States
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15650
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- In March 2011 Lockhart’s truck mirror was struck by a U.S. Army Corps park ranger’s mirror while the ranger looked away to adjust a radio; the government conceded liability under the FTCA because the ranger acted within scope of employment.
- Lockhart experienced shoulder pain after the collision; imaging showed advanced degenerative shoulder changes (glenohumeral and AC joint arthritis, rotator cuff degeneration) and later underwent total left-shoulder replacement after conservative care failed.
- Lockhart’s treating orthopedist attributed the degenerative changes to long-term disease but said the collision may have triggered symptoms; the government’s expert opined the collision accounted for at most 20% of the need for shoulder replacement.
- The district court (bench trial) found the government 100% at fault for the collision but held the collision only 20% responsible for Lockhart’s need for surgery, awarding 20% of $53,968.42 in medical expenses plus $10,000 for pain and suffering and $22,000 lost income.
- Lockhart appealed, arguing Missouri law required full compensation for injuries that were “directly caused or directly contributed to cause” by the collision and that the court improperly reduced medical and non-economic damages by 80%.
- The Eighth Circuit affirmed, applying Missouri law and precedent allowing apportionment between degenerative pre-existing conditions and aggravation by defendant’s negligence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Missouri law permits apportioning damages when a pre-existing degenerative condition and a negligent collision both contribute | Lockhart: once the collision is found to have contributed, Missouri requires full compensation under the “directly caused or directly contributed to cause” standard | U.S.: Missouri law allows recovery only for the portion of damages directly caused or contributed to by defendant; pre-existing disease not attributable to defendant can be excluded | Held: Apportionment is permitted; district court may allocate damages between degenerative condition and aggravation (affirmed 20% attributable to collision) |
| Whether the district court misapplied the 20% attribution only to surgery cost rather than all shoulder-related medical expenses | Lockhart: 20% applied by experts only to surgery cost; other related medical costs should not be reduced | U.S.: Expert tied 20% to the need for surgery, which encompasses related pre- and post-operative care | Held: No clear error; 20% properly applied to total medical expenses related to the shoulder injury |
| Whether reducing pain-and-suffering award by 80% was improper | Lockhart: non-economic damages should not be reduced or should be higher given contribution finding | U.S.: Pain-and-suffering should be apportioned consistent with compensable portion of injury | Held: No abuse of discretion; $10,000 is commensurate with nature/extent of compensable injury and not plainly unjust |
| Standard of review for damages determinations in FTCA bench trial | Lockhart: (implicit) challenges findings of fact/legal application | U.S.: (implicit) district court’s factual findings reviewed for clear error; non-economic awards for abuse of discretion | Held: Court applied correct standards—clear error for facts, abuse of discretion for non-economic damages; affirmance warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Sheridan v. United States, 487 U.S. 392 (holding FTCA applies state substantive law for liability and damages)
- Carlson v. K-Mart Corp., 979 S.W.2d 145 (Mo. banc 1998) (Missouri requires modifying "direct result" language to "directly caused or directly contributed to cause" and permits apportionment among multiple causes)
- Kingman v. Dillard's, Inc., 643 F.3d 607 (8th Cir. 2011) (plaintiff cannot recover for conditions wholly due to prior disease; recovery allowed for aggravation)
- Wilkinson v. United States, 564 F.3d 927 (8th Cir. 2009) (FTCA damages governed by state law; review standards for FTCA damages)
- Gonzalez v. United States, 681 F.3d 949 (8th Cir. 2012) (bench-trial damages findings reviewed for clear error; special circumstances in non-jury damage findings)
- Sanders v. Ahmed, 364 S.W.3d 195 (Mo. banc 2012) (aggravation of an initial injury by third-party negligence entitles recovery only for damage attributable to the aggravation)