Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Crossgrove
2012 CO 31
| Colo. | 2012Background
- Crossgrove was struck by a Wal-Mart overhead door while delivering cookies in Trinidad, Colorado.
- Medical bills totaled about $250,000; insurer paid $40,000 in full satisfaction.
- Plaintiff sued Wal-Mart for negligence; trial court admitted evidence of the $40,000 payment as value.
- Jury awarded Crossgrove $50,000 economic and $27,375 noneconomic damages; Crossgrove was 20% at fault.
- Trial court reduced verdict by $40,000 under § 13-21-111.6 and by Crossgrove's fault percentage.
- Court of Appeals reversed admission of insurer payment; Supreme Court affirmed reversal and remanded for new damages trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether pre-verdict collateral source evidence was improperly admitted | Crossgrove: pre-verdict evidence should be excluded under collateral source rule | Wal-Mart: evidence of amount paid is admissible as reasonable value under Kendall | Pre-verdict evidence properly excluded |
| Whether § 13-21-111.6 abrogates the pre-verdict evidentiary component | Crossgrove: statute does not affect pre-verdict evidence | Wal-Mart: statute abrogates broader collateral source effects | Statute abrogates post-verdict component only; pre-verdict rule remains |
Key Cases Cited
- Carr v. Boyd, 123 Colo. 350 (1951) (pre-verdict collateral source evidence barred)
- Gardenswartz, 242 P.3d 1080 (Colo. 2010) (collateral source rule applies to post-verdict context; dissent discusses pre-verdict)
- Kendall v. Hargrave, 349 P.2d 993 (Colo. 1960) (reasonable value of medical services; amount paid is evidence of value)
- Eichel v. New York Central Railroad Co., 375 U.S. 253 (1963) (evidence of collateral benefits can prejudice jury; inadmissible for offset)
- Van Waters & Rogers, Inc. v. Keelan, 840 P.2d 1070 (Colo. 1992) (collateral source doctrine and post-verdict application)