Warenski v. Advanced Rv Supply
2011 UT App 197
| Utah Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Warenski sues Advanced RV Supply for negligence over a tie rod installation on his ATV allegedly causing a crash.
- Advanced RV Supply moves for summary judgment, arguing no genuine issue of material fact and lack of admissible expert proof.
- Warenski designates Fred Smith as a fact witness and attempts to rely on Smith for res ipsa loquitur and standard of care, or argues expert testimony not always required.
- District court grants summary judgment, finding Warenski failed to designate an expert, and that res ipsa loquitur elements were not established.
- On appeal, Warenski argues Smith’s opinion, if expert, supports res ipsa loquitur or, alternatively, that no expert is needed for the standard of care; Advanced RV Supply maintains no expert designation and no res ipsa elements were proven.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res ipsa loquitur can support negligence without designated expert testimony | Warenski claims Smith’s testimony establishes res ipsa elements | Advanced RV Supply shows lack of expert designation and insufficient res ipsa proof | No; res ipsa not established without proper expert designation or evidence |
| Whether Smith’s testimony could be considered expert despite designation issues | Smith was an expert whose opinion rebutted defendant’s evidence | Smith was not properly designated as an expert | Smith’s expert opinion excluded from consideration |
| Whether the evidence shows breach and causation via res ipsa loquitur or direct proof | Evidence supports breach/cause through res ipsa | Evidence fails first two elements of res ipsa; no breach shown | Warenski failed to prove first two elements of res ipsa loquitur; district court proper |
| Whether the case could proceed to trial under any theory | Res ipsa or undisclosed standard of care could go to jury | No triable issues on elements of negligence or res ipsa | Summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- King v. Searle Pharm., Inc., 832 P.2d 858 (Utah 1992) (res ipsa loquitur elements; expert needed when appropriate)
- Ballow v. Monroe, 699 P.2d 719 (Utah 1985) (balance of probabilities for res ipsa negligence)
- Robinson v. Intermountain Health Care, Inc., 740 P.2d 262 (Utah Ct. App. 1987) (expert proof required to dispute defendant's causation)
- Webb v. University of Utah, 125 P.3d 906 (Utah 2005) (four elements of negligence; duty, breach, causation, damages)
- Orvis v. Johnson, 177 P.3d 600 (Utah 2008) (summary judgment standards in negligence; burden shifting)
- Price v. Smith's Food & Drug Ctrs., Inc., 252 P.3d 365 (Utah App. 2011) (negligence summary judgment standard; inference drawing)
- Nielsen v. Pioneer Valley Hosp., 830 P.2d 270 (Utah 1992) (common knowledge vs expert necessity in standard of care)
- Dalley v. Utah Valley Reg'l Med. Ctr., 791 P.2d 193 (Utah 1990) (common knowledge of layperson vs expert in procedures)
- State v. Sellers, 248 P.3d 70 (Utah App. 2011) (commentary on expert/testimony standards)