Peach v. McGovern
2017 IL App (5th) 160264
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- On July 17, 2010 Peach was rear-ended while stopped at a stop sign; defendant McGovern was ticketed and pled guilty to failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident.
- Court directed a verdict for Peach on negligence; jury reserved causation and damages, then returned a defense verdict awarding Peach nothing.
- Peach sought treatment immediately: ER visit, ongoing care with Dr. Templer, MRI showing acute cervical findings (straightening of lordosis, C3-4 disc protrusion, foraminal narrowing) and diagnoses including whiplash and possible radiculopathy; medical bills exceeded $23,000.
- Dr. Templer testified low-speed impacts can cause the reported cervical injuries and attributed Peach’s injuries to the rear-end collision, but said he was not qualified to relate vehicle damage to injury mechanics.
- Defense introduced photographs of vehicle damage over Peach’s motion in limine; defense argued during closing that minimal vehicle damage disproved Peach’s claimed injuries, without offering an expert to correlate vehicle damage and bodily injury.
- Appellate court reversed, finding (1) admission/use of vehicle-damage photos to argue lack of injury—without expert correlation—was an abuse of discretion, and (2) the jury verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence on causation and damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of vehicle-damage photographs to challenge injury magnitude | Peach: photos were irrelevant to causation/damages absent expert linking vehicle damage to injuries; court should exclude them | McGovern: photos show minimal damage and impeach Peach’s credibility; admissible to infer lack of serious injury | Reversed trial court: photos not admissible to correlate vehicular damage with complex cervical injuries without expert testimony; admitting/using them to argue lack of injury was an abuse of discretion |
| Whether jury verdict (no damages) was against manifest weight of the evidence | Peach: uncontradicted medical evidence, immediate treatment, and expert opinion linking collision to injuries required at least damages for medical bills | McGovern: jury could disbelieve testimony and rely on photos to conclude no injury | Reversed: verdict against manifest weight—evidence supported causation and damages; reasonable jury should have awarded at least medical expenses |
| Standard for admitting vehicle-damage photos in soft-tissue/complex injury cases | Peach: follow Baraniak/DiCosola requiring expert to connect vehicle damage to injury | McGovern: follow Fronabarger allowing photos if jury can relate damage to injury without expert | Court favored Baraniak/DiCosola here: when injuries are beyond ordinary juror’s ken, expert is required to tie photos to injuries |
| Use of new literature in appellate appendix | Peach included articles not in trial record to support arguments | McGovern moved to strike appendix material not presented at trial | Motion to strike granted; appellate court may not consider evidence not in trial record |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. Grizzle, 398 Ill. App. 3d 639 (2010) (standard for abuse of discretion and manifest-weight review)
- Fronabarger v. Burns, 385 Ill. App. 3d 560 (2008) (permitting vehicle-damage photos where jury can relate damage to injury; often tied to expert evidence)
- Baraniak v. Kurby, 371 Ill. App. 3d 310 (2007) (absent expert correlating vehicle damage and injury, photos of minimal vehicle damage should be excluded)
- DiCosola v. Bowman, 342 Ill. App. 3d 530 (2003) (no bright-line rule making photos of minor vehicle damage automatically admissible to show lack of bodily injury)
- Magna Trust Co. v. Illinois Central R.R. Co., 313 Ill. App. 3d 375 (1999) (closing-argument comments must be proven by evidence or reasonably inferable from facts)