Razorback Cab of Fort Smith, Inc. v. Amon
2016 Ark. App. 352
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- On Jan. 15, 2013, Mark Nunez, driving a Razorback Cab minivan, turned left at an intersection and collided with Danaye Amon, who was driving straight through the intersection at the posted 40 mph speed limit; Amon’s car hit a railroad-crossing post thereafter.
- Amon sought emergency care; x-rays showed no fractures. She later developed neck and back pain, received pain-management and chiropractic care, and was released by her physicians by April 2013.
- Amon sued Razorback (Razorback Cab and Nunez) for negligence in Sept. 2013. After a two-day trial a jury found Razorback wholly at fault and awarded Amon $50,000; the trial court denied Razorback’s motion for a new trial.
- Razorback appealed, raising several trial-evidence and procedure issues: allegedly improper "send-a-message" closing argument; exclusion/redaction of Dr. Vera Collins’s deposition and notes (which referenced psychiatric care and alleged drug-seeking); discovery/exclusion issues over impeachment materials for Dr. Danny Silver; and a refused jury instruction on speed.
- The court reviewed the trial court’s evidentiary and argument-control rulings for abuse of discretion and affirmed the judgment in favor of Amon.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Amon) | Defendant's Argument (Razorback) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alleged improper "send-a-message" closing argument | Counsel’s remark was a permissible theme urging liability and safety; not punitive. | The remark sought punitive/deterrent damages (prohibited absent punitive damages) and the court should have struck it or instructed jury to disregard. | No abuse of discretion; remark viewed in context as plea for liability, not punishment; trial court’s control of closing was proper. |
| Admission/redaction of Dr. Collins’s notes and exclusion of her deposition | Redactions appropriate because Collins’s visit concerned longstanding anxiety unrelated to crash; admitting drug-seeking notes would be prejudicial. Deposition excluded because Collins’s attorney limited cross-examination and prevented testing of expert opinion. | Collins’s deposition and unredacted notes impeach Amon and show non-accident-related treatment; exclusion prejudiced defense. | No abuse of discretion; redaction relevance/ prejudice rationale valid and deposition properly excluded because defense impeded cross-examination of alleged expert. |
| Use of undisclosed impeachment documents about Dr. Silver (discovery) | Excluding documents was proper because Razorback failed to supplement discovery, leaving Amon unprepared. | Documents were public records and admissible despite nonproduction. | No abuse of discretion; trial court reasonably imposed discovery-related exclusion as sanction. |
| Refusal to give proffered speed instruction | Court’s existing instructions already covered reasonable/prudent speed and reduced speed at intersections/rail crossings. | Requested instruction clarified that posted limit is a maximum not always safe and should have been given. | No error; matter substantially covered by other instructions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stecker v. First Commercial Trust Co., 331 Ark. 452 (discussion of prohibition on send-a-message arguments in cases not seeking punitive damages)
- National Bank of Commerce v. Quirk, 323 Ark. 769 (trial court has broad discretion to control closing arguments; abuse-of-discretion standard)
- McCoy v. Montgomery, 370 Ark. 333 (expert testimony may be stricken for unresponsiveness; abuse-of-discretion review)
- Brumley v. Keech, 2012 Ark. (trial-court evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Findley v. State, 307 Ark. 53 (exclusion is not prejudicial if the same evidence was introduced through another source)