2005 Ohio 6950 | Ohio Ct. App. | 2005
Lead Opinion
{¶ 2} On July 29, 2004, appellant filed a complaint against appellee for negligence and damages for injuries as a result of the accident.
{¶ 3} Prior to trial, appellee admitted liability. A jury trial on damages commenced on May 2, 2005. The jury awarded appellant $4,722.50 for medical expenses and $0 for pain and suffering.
{¶ 4} On May 13, 2005, appellant filed a motion for new trial. By judgment entry filed May 19, 2005, the trial court denied the motion.
{¶ 5} Appellant filed an appeal and this matter is now before this court for consideration. Assignments of error are as follows:
{¶ 9} A judgment supported by some competent, credible evidence will not be reversed by a reviewing court as against the manifest weight of the evidence. C.E. Morris Co. v. FoleyConstruction Co. (1978),
{¶ 10} Appellant argues because there was no evidence contrary to his position that he experienced pain and suffering as a result of the accident, the decision to award zero damages for pain and suffering was error.
{¶ 11} This case involved an uncontested liability accident wherein appellee presented only himself as a witness for the defense. Appellant testified immediately after the accident he did not feel well, but refused treatment at the scene. T. at 37. Upon arriving at work that day, appellant's back began to hurt and he sought chiropractic treatment from Edward Waldo, D.C.T. at 37-41. After daily treatments, appellant progressively got better. T. at 41. Appellant could not "do much of anything at work" as he "can't lift anything to this day," but he never took time off from work. T. at 42. After stopping treatment with Dr. Waldo, appellant sought the advice of Paul Welch, M.D., but received no treatment from him. T. at 43-44. Appellant took Ibuprofen two to three times a day and went to physical therapy for approximately two months and felt better. T. at 45-46. However, appellant was still unable to resume his normal activities. T. at 46-47, 52, 59-60.
{¶ 12} Appellant's wife, Claire Brozovic, testified that after the accident, appellant's ability to do things at work and at home was diminished. T. at 92-94, 97-98. She testified appellant did not get better right away and over the course of the first few months, appellant "walked very stiffly" and "couldn't walk very far" and "can't move around like he used to." T. at 96. Mrs. Brozovic stated to this day, appellant "still can't walk like, like he normally used to walk." T. at 100.
{¶ 13} Because of the unrefuted evidence of appellant's physical discomfort resulting in treatments with a chiropractor, physical therapy and an MRI, we find sufficient credible evidence to award a sum for pain and suffering.
{¶ 14} Assignments of Error I and II are granted.
{¶ 15} The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County, Ohio is reversed on the issue of pain and suffering only and the matter is remanded for trial on said issue.
Gwin, P.J. concurs
Edwards J. concurs separately
Concurrence Opinion
{¶ 16} I concur with the majority as to the analysis and disposition of this case. I write separately to indicate that I also base my decision on the fact that the jury compensated appellant for his medical bills, which seems to indicate that the jury finds the appellant's trips to the doctor to be necessary. In other words, the jury found the appellant credible regarding his necessity to receive medical treatment for pain.