Joines v. Moffitt
226 N.C. App. 61
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Motor vehicle collision occurred February 5, 2008 at Highway 115 and Plaza Drive intersection in Mooresville, NC.
- Plaintiff bicycled motorcycle; moved into left turn lane approaching intersection; defendant exited parking lot and merged onto highway.
- Collision occurred as defendant merged; plaintiff was struck in the leg and later had part of his right leg amputated.
- Officer Allen created an accident report with narrative and a hand-drawn diagram based on information from defendant and two witnesses.
- Plaintiff filed suit February 16, 2010 alleging defendant's negligence and defendant raised contributory negligence as a defense.
- Jury found defendant negligent and plaintiff contributorily negligent; trial court entered judgment accordingly; plaintiff appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of the accident report | Plaintiff argues narrative/diagram should be redacted as hearsay. | Report properly admitted as business records under Rule 803(6). | Report admitted; narrative/diagram not redacted; proper foundation shown. |
| Closing argument references to Fisk v. Murphy | Closing argument improperly cited another case to persuade the verdict. | Arguments were not transcribed; record incomplete; cannot review. | Issue dismissed for lack of complete record. |
| Voir dire of Officer Allen | Trial court limited voir dire preventing challenge to trustworthiness. | Court acted within discretion; cross-examination occurred in trial. | No abuse of discretion; voir dire properly limited. |
| Right of way testimony by Officer Allen | Officer should be allowed to testify who had right of way as lay opinion. | Officer lacked personal knowledge to render such opinion; improper. | Excluded; officer's lay opinion on right of way properly not admitted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nunnery v. Baucom, 135 N.C. App. 556 (1999) (trustworthiness of portions of accident report based on witnesses allowed)
- Wentz v. Unifi, Inc., 89 N.C. App. 33 (1988) (business records admissible if properly authenticated)
- Seay v. Snyder, 181 N.C. App. 248 (2007) (diagrams cannot express improper conclusions; distinguishable fact pattern)
- State v. Castor, 150 N.C. App. 17 (2002) (catch-all Rule 803(24) requires explicit findings; business record exception does not)
- Jones v. Bailey, 246 N.C. 599 (1957) (trial court properly excluded officer's opinion on right of way; jury decides crucial issue)
- Wilcox v. Glover Motors, Inc., 269 N.C. 473 (1967) (not permissible for counsel to present facts from another case as premises)
- Blackwell v. Hatley, 202 N.C. App. 208 (2010) (police testimony as to conclusions based on facts may be inadmissible)