Karr v. Salido
2024 Ohio 1141
Ohio Ct. App.2024Background
- Plaintiff Ryan Karr, representing himself, sued Joan Salido for negligence after a 2018 automobile accident, claiming personal injury and total loss of his vehicle.
- The trial court granted defendant’s motions in limine to exclude evidence of insurance, traffic citation, and settlement negotiations before trial; it did not rule on exclusion of the police report or Karr’s request to exclude his own medical records.
- Karr failed to disclose any expert witnesses or provide medical records or bills to establish causation for his injuries as required by local rule and Civil Procedure.
- After Karr’s opening statement, Salido moved for a directed verdict on bodily injury claims due to lack of expert testimony; this was granted.
- The trial continued on liability and property damage, but Karr failed to present competent evidence for the car’s value before and after the accident; Salido’s subsequent motion for directed verdict on these issues was also granted.
- Karr’s post-trial motion for a new trial was denied, and his appellate challenges included both substantive and procedural claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Directed verdict on medical claims | Trial court erred; evidence should have gone to jury | No expert testimony—claims fail as matter of law | For Salido: Expert testimony required, not provided |
| Directed verdict on property damage | Sufficient evidence on car value pre-accident | No competent evidence of value or salvage post-accident | For Salido: Insufficient competent evidence |
| Judicial bias and evidentiary rulings | Court showed bias and erred in evidentiary decisions | No specific evidence of bias; evidentiary rulings proper | For Salido: No support for bias or error |
| Denial of new trial | Entitled to new trial for alleged errors/misconduct | No grounds shown for new trial; trial court acted properly | For Salido: No error or grounds for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Darnell v. Eastman, 23 Ohio St.2d 13 (soft tissue injury causation must be shown by expert medical testimony)
- Falter v. Toledo, 169 Ohio St. 238 (measure of damages for motor vehicle property loss is difference in value before and after collision)
- Brinkmoeller v. Wilson, 41 Ohio St.2d 223 (standard for granting directed verdict following opening statement)
- Hayes Freight Lines, Inc. v. Tarver, 148 Ohio St. 82 (making plaintiff whole through property damages for total loss)