Metropolitan Transit Authority v. Calvin McChristian
449 S.W.3d 846
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- McChristian sued Metro after a February 8, 2010 collision between a Metro light-rail train and a Metro bus, seeking damages for neck injuries shown on MRI and treated by orthopedic surgeon Dr. Jeffrey Reuben.
- Trial (two days) focused only on damages; jury awarded $22,650 for past medical expenses and $5,000 for past physical pain and mental anguish.
- McChristian introduced medical bills totaling $31,264.99; he testified the bills were unpaid and his responsibility; records from St. Joseph listed him as uninsured.
- Dr. Reuben (by deposition) diagnosed multi-level cervical disc herniations and opined to a reasonable degree of medical probability that the injuries were caused by the February 2010 accident.
- Metro moved for JNOV and for new trial, arguing (1) medical causation evidence was insufficient, (2) medical bills were inadmissible under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.0105 because billed amounts were not shown to be actually paid or incurred, and (3) McChristian’s counsel made incurable jury argument (the “snake oil” remark).
- Trial court denied JNOV and the new trial motion; on appeal the Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting Metro’s challenges to causation, admissibility of medical bills, and claim of incurable jury argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal sufficiency of causation evidence | Dr. Reuben’s opinion and MRI support causation | Dr. Reuben’s opinion was unreliable/insufficient to show accident caused neck injury | Affirmed — more than a scintilla supports causation; Metro failed to preserve a reliability challenge and the opinion was not conclusory |
| Admissibility of medical bills under § 41.0105 (actually paid or incurred) | Bills, records showing uninsured status, and testimony show amounts are plaintiff’s unpaid responsibility | Billed amounts may include insurer adjustments or write-offs and were not shown to be actually paid or owed | Affirmed — record (uninsured status, bills showing no adjustments, plaintiff testimony) shows no basis to treat bills as unrecoverable list prices |
| Alleged incurable jury argument ("snake oil") | Rebuttal closing comment was not extreme or incurable; typical rhetorical argument | Argument was a personal attack on defense counsel that could not be cured and warrants new trial | Affirmed — remark not so extreme as to be incurable; trial court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (legal-sufficiency standard for civil cases)
- City of San Antonio v. Pollock, 284 S.W.3d 809 (Tex. 2009) (preservation rule for scientific/reliability challenges to expert testimony)
- Maritime Overseas Corp. v. Ellis, 971 S.W.2d 402 (Tex. 1998) (need to object to scientific evidence reliability at trial to preserve complaint)
- Arkoma Basin Exploration Co. v. FMF Assocs., 249 S.W.3d 380 (Tex. 2008) (conclusory expert opinions)
- Haygood v. De Escabedo, 356 S.W.3d 390 (Tex. 2011) (§ 41.0105 limits admissible medical expenses to amounts actually paid or incurred)
- Big Bird Tree Servs. v. Gallegos, 365 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012) (distinguishing Haygood where no evidence of contractual limitations on hospital recovery)
- Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Reese, 584 S.W.2d 835 (Tex. 1979) (elements to obtain reversal for improper jury argument)
- Living Ctrs. of Tex., Inc. v. Penalver, 256 S.W.3d 678 (Tex. 2008) (incurable jury argument reserved for extreme, inflammatory remarks)
- Phillips v. Bramlett, 288 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. 2009) (preservation and motion-for-new-trial aspects for incurable argument)
- Marathon Corp. v. Pitzner, 106 S.W.3d 724 (Tex. 2003) (grounds for sustaining legal-sufficiency challenge)