 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Richey-Butts v. Lay11/16/2001
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Michael D. Huppert, Judge.
Plaintiff appeals following a trial on her personal injury action in which the jury found the actions of the defendant were not the proximate cause of injuries allegedly suffered by the plaintiff. AFFIRMED.
In this personal injury action arising from a car accident, plaintiff Pamela Richey-Butts contends the district court should have overturned the jury's defense verdict and granted her a new trial. Finding no abuse of discretion in the court's denial of her new trial motion, we affirm.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
Richey-Butts was driving along a snow-packed Des Moines boulevard when a sport utility vehicle driven by Elizabeth Lay crossed her path and hit her left front fender. Richey-Butts' car skidded into a snowbank. Richey-Butts called the police, got out of the passenger side of the car, exchanged information with Lay, took several pictures of her own car, waited for the police, and, after they arrived, drove home.
Richey-Butts filed a negligence action against Lay. At trial, Lay admitted she was negligent but did not agree that her negligence proximately caused Richey-Butts' damages. The jury sided with Lay. Richey-Butts moved for a new trial but the district court denied the motion. This appeal followed.
II. Scope of Review
The scope of our review of a district court's denial of a motion for new trial depends on the grounds alleged in the motion and ruled upon by the district court. Hoskinson v. City of Iowa City, 621 N.W.2d 425, 426 (Iowa 2001). We review the court's ruling as it pertains to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury verdict for abuse of discretion. See Ladeburg v. Ray, 508 N.W.2d 694, 696 (Iowa 1993) (citing Shepherd Components, Inc. v. Brice Petrides-Donohue & Assocs., Inc., 473 N.W.2d 612, 618 (Iowa 1991)). We review claims that the court's ruling is contrary to law for errors of law. Greenwood v. Mitchell, 621 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Iowa 2001).
Richey-Butts' primary argument is that the verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence. Although Richey-Butts also suggests the verdict is contrary to law and does not effect substantial justice, these arguments are actually repackaged challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdict. Therefore, our review is for abuse of discretion.
III. Denial of New Trial Motion
A. Causation Standard
The concept of causation has two components. There must be a determination of whether: (1) the harm would have occurred but for the defendant's negligence and (2) the defendant's negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm. Rieger v. Jacque, 584 N.W.2d 247, 251 (Iowa 1998). The second component implicates the concept of proximate cause. Id. Given this two-fold analysis, it is entirely possible to find a defendant negligent without finding the negligence to be a proximate cause of damages.
B. Sufficiency of Evidence
The sole question we must decide is whether there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that Lay's negligence was not the proximate cause of Richey-Butts' damages. See Ten Hagen v. DeNooy, 563 N.W.2d 4, 9 (Iowa Ct. App. 1997). Richey-Butts sought damages for the following injuries she claimed she sustained in the accident with Lay: (1) neck pain; (2) right shoulder pain; (3) back problems; and (4) mental health problems. We will examine the evidence relating to each of these claimed injuries.
1. Neck Pain.
Richey-Butts testified she experienced neck pain following the accident with Lay. He
Page 1 2 3 Iowa Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|