256 So. 3d 1016
La. Ct. App.2018Background
- On June 21, 2011 Patricia Spann lost control of her Chevrolet Cobalt, crossed the median, and sustained facial fractures, thoracic and lumbar spine fractures, and a left wrist fracture; she was hospitalized 16 days.
- Spann sued Gerry Lane Enterprises (the dealer that performed a GM power-steering recall replacement), its insurer Tower, and unnamed employees, alleging a defective redhibitory repair and negligent hiring/training/repair under products-liability and tort theories.
- Judge pro tempore granted Gerry Lane summary judgment; Spann obtained a new trial after filing a motion alleging the summary judgment was contrary to law and she produced supplemental expert reports.
- At trial a jury found Spann 70% at fault and Gerry Lane 30% at fault, awarded medical expenses, lost wages, and $25,000 for loss of physical abilities/disfigurement, but awarded $0 for pain and suffering, mental anguish, or loss of enjoyment of life.
- The trial court granted Spann JNOV on general damages, increasing general damages by $700,000 (later described as $400,000 past/future pain and suffering, $150,000 mental anguish, $150,000 loss of enjoyment), resulting in a net additional award of $210,000 after apportionment.
- On appeal this court affirmed most rulings, held the expert testimony admissible, upheld the denial of contempt/exclusion related to expert inspections, affirmed granting a new trial from summary judgment, but reduced the supplemental general-damages award from $700,000 to $100,000 (so total general damages = $125,000 including the jury award).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of plaintiff's expert (Daubert/LSA-C.E. art. 702) | Carrick's inspections and engineering opinion reliably showed improper installation and component corrosion causing steering failure. | Carrick's conclusions lack scientific basis and are unreliable; should be excluded. | Court: Daubert challenge targeted weight, not methodology; trial court did not abuse discretion — expert testimony admissible. |
| Use of evidence from post-consent-judgment inspections (alleged violation of court order/spoliation) | Subsequent inspections were not willful contempt and did not prejudice defendants; exclusion not warranted. | Carrick's second and third inspections violated a consent order forbidding alteration, testing or removal of parts; evidence should be excluded as spoliated or contempt. | Court: Spoliation not preserved; trial court reasonably found no intentional violation and did not abuse discretion in admitting evidence. |
| Trial court's grant of new trial reopening summary judgment | New expert materials plus existing evidence showed summary judgment was contrary to law and fact; new trial appropriate. | "New" evidence was discoverable earlier; trial court erred to reopen dismissal. | Court: Grant of new trial was not an abuse of discretion; denial of reurged summary judgment and allowance to proceed to trial was proper. |
| JNOV increasing general damages from $25,000 to $725,000 total (jury had awarded only $25,000 general) | Jury verdict awarding medical expenses but $0 for pain/mental anguish was inconsistent; increased general damages were warranted. | The jury reasonably awarded $25,000 for general damages and the JNOV/additur was improper—award should stand as jury found. | Court: Verdict was inconsistent given severe injuries and hospital stay; JNOV on general damages proper, but $700,000 increase was an abuse of discretion. Court amended additional award to $100,000 (total general damages $125,000) and affirmed judgment as amended. |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (expert admissibility standard; methodology-focused gatekeeping)
- Wainwright v. Fontenot, 774 So.2d 70 (La. 2000) (consistency review when jury awards medical expenses but no general damages)
- Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 623 So.2d 1257 (La. 1993) (standard for appellate review and deference on general-damages awards)
- Freeman v. Fon's Pest Mgmt., Inc., 235 So.3d 1087 (La. 2017) (Daubert analysis emphasizing methodology vs. weight of opinion)
- Hopkins v. American Cyanamid Co., 666 So.2d 615 (La. 1996) (appellate review should consider entire record after full trial when reviewing interlocutory summary-judgment rulings)
- Junot v. Morgan, 818 So.2d 152 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2002) (criteria for appellate review of JNOV increasing low general-damage awards)