Roy v. Gray
967 N.E.2d 800
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Collision in a daylight construction zone; pole on a Shaw Group truck enters Roys’ van when Gray turns left.
- Jury verdict found Gray and Shaw Group negligent, with 80% fault to Gray/Shaw and 20% to Roys; punitive damages awarded.
- Trial court denied JNOV or new trial on punitive damages; compensatory damages reduced by 20% for comparative negligence.
- Roys’ posttrial motions granted some items (attorney fees) but final judgment stayed pending appeal; appellate review focused on admissibility of expert testimony.
- Court ultimately reverses and remands for new trial due to improper and prejudicial expert testimony by a police officer and improper statutory-interpretation testimony under R.C. 5577.05
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| whether admission of improper expert testimony denied due process on punitive-damages issue | Roys contend improper testimony improperly influenced punitive-damages finding | Gray/Shaw Group argue admissibility of testimony supported their case | remanded for new trial; issues on punitive damages mooted by remand |
| whether Deputy Tarr and Higinbotham improperly interpreted accident statute and offered expert opinions | Roys argue admissible as lay/opinion testimony; experts provided legal interpretation | Gray/Shaw Group contend improper expert-interpretation testimony | abuse of discretion; admissions prejudicial; reversal on this portion; remand for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Scott v. Yates, 71 Ohio St.3d 219 (1994) (accident-investigation vs. accident reconstruction; police testimony limited to data; expert use disallowed for causation)