Jones v. Bowie Industries, Inc.
282 P.3d 316
Alaska2012Background
- Jones, injured in 2008 while feeding a mulch bale into a Bowie hydromulcher, received workers' compensation and later sued Bowie Industries, Todd Christianson, and Great Alaska Lawn and Landscaping for design, warning, and supplier negligence; Titan Enterprises owned the hydromulcher at the time of the accident.
- The hydromulcher had no guarding around the feed opening beyond a six-inch lip, and Jones used his foot to push a bale when it fed improperly, which caused his leg to be amputated above the knee.
- Bowie moved to limit post-sale duty to warn and sought to allocate fault to Titan; AIG intervened to protect its workers' compensation lien.
- Evidence was admitted at trial showing Jones's workers' compensation and social security benefits and his past drug use, and testimony was admitted and argued to show malingering and future earning capacity.
- The jury found various findings of negligence and fault; the court later granted a new trial on appeal due to erroneous admission of collateral-source and drug-use evidence, remanding against Bowie and Great Alaska Lawn for new trials, while affirming punitive-damages instructions and certain other rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of collateral-source benefits and drug use evidence | Jones: collateral-source and drug-use evidence were unfairly prejudicial and should be excluded. | Bowie: evidence was probative for malingering and future earnings; trial court properly weighed 403 factors. | Admission was an abuse of discretion; reversible error. |
| Negligence per se instruction against Great Alaska Lawn | Jones sought negligence per se instruction based on OSHA violations. | Bowie argued no duty to warn as supplier; OSHA duty limited to employer context. | Court did not err in refusing negligence per se instruction against Great Alaska Lawn. |
| Effect of statute of repose on negligence claims | AS 09.10.055(b)(1)(E) defective-product exception extends to negligence claims. | Bowie urged repose extinguished negligence claims. | Statute of repose does not extinguish Jones's negligence claims. |
| Punitive damages instruction | Jones argued Bowie’s conduct warranted punitive damages. | Bowie contended due process issues and insufficient evidence. | Trial court properly instructed on punitive damages; no reversible error. |
| Directed verdict against Christianson | Evidence supported piercing the corporate veil or personal liability. | Insufficient veil-piercing evidence. | Directed verdict against Christianson not clearly erroneous; on remand it may be reconsidered. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tolan v. ERA Helicopters, Inc., 699 P.2d 1265 (Alaska 1985) (collateral-source evidence considered under Rule 403 balancing; some admissible for malingering)
- Liimatta v. Vest, 45 P.3d 310 (Alaska 2002) (collateral-source and drug-use evidence generally prejudicial; need balancing)
- Loncar v. Gray, 28 P.3d 928 (Alaska 2001) (exclusion of Medicaid/Medicare evidence under collateral-source rules)
- Cable v. Shefchik, unknown (not provided) (Alaska) (distinguishing cases on negligence per se against employers vs. suppliers)
- L.D.G., Inc. v. Brown, 211 P.3d 1110 (Alaska 2009) (use of earlier precedents in evaluating evidentiary rulings)
- Brandner v. Hudson, 171 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2007) (factors for piercing corporate veil and corporate-winding considerations)
- Tolan v. ERA Helicopters, Inc. (Restatement discussion referenced), 699 P.2d 1265 (Alaska 1985) (collateral-source balancing framework)