 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Stycket v. Vanorsdel9/13/2000
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Richard G. Blane, II, Judge.
Plaintiffs in a personal injury action appeal from a ruling on defendant's motion in limine which prevented them from introducing evidence of some of the alleged damages. AFFIRMED.
Aleisha Stycket, by her next friend, Susan Stycket, and Susan Stycket, individually, appeal a ruling of the trial court which prevented them from introducing evidence of damages. They contend the trial court erred in entering a discovery sanction against them which prevented them from introducing evidence about past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of function of the mind and body, and future medical expenses for Susan and for a consortium claim of Aleisha. We affirm.
Background and Proceedings.
On April 18, 1996, there was an accident involving a motor vehicle that Aleisha Stycket was operating in Des Moines, Iowa. John Vanorsdel struck the rear end of a motor vehicle being operated by Donna Wetter who in turn struck the rear end of a motor vehicle being operated by Pamela Ternus who in turn struck the rear end of the plaintiffs' vehicle.
On April 13, 1998, a petition was filed by Susan Stycket, individually and on behalf of Aleisha Stycket as her next friend, alleging negligence on behalf of the defendants and requesting compensatory damages.
On June 18, 1998, Vanorsdel propounded interrogatories to the plaintiffs and requested production of certain documents. On September 28, 1998, the plaintiffs provided answers to the interrogatories and responses to the production of documents, however, their answer to Interrogatory No. 11 was "Undetermined at this time. The answer will be amended as the discovery process continues."
This interrogatory asked the plaintiffs to "Identify and describe in detail each and every element of damages plaintiffs claim to have sustained as a result of the defendant's alleged wrongful conduct or act complained of in this litigation." It requested the amounts be stated and the methods and calculations used in support of the claims, including a description of the categories or items of damages allegedly sustained. It requested further supporting information used to arrive at these amounts.
The trial was set for July 12, 1999. The scheduling order provided, among other matters, all discovery shall be completed by May 12, 1999.
On December 1, 1998, Vanorsdel's attorney wrote to the plaintiffs' attorney requesting the answer to Interrogatory No. 11 be supplemented prior to the date of taking the plaintiffs' deposition. On January 7, 1999, Vanorsdel's attorney again wrote to plaintiffs' attorney pointing out Interrogatory No. 11 had not been supplemented. On June 5, 1999, the defendant received supplemental answers to Interrogatories No. 5, 9, 12, and 16, but they did not receive a supplemental answer to Interrogatory No. 11.
Vanorsdel filed a motion in limine which came before the court for hearing at the pretrial conference on July 7, 1999. In that motion, Vanorsdel moved for an order in limine requiring the plaintiffs and their witnesses and counsel to refrain from attempting to admit any evidence concerning plaintiffs' damages because Interrogatory No. 11 had not been supplemented.
On July 7, 1999, after the hearing, the court entered an order sustaining portions of Vanorsdel's motion in limine. The order prohibited Aleisha Stycket from claiming any damages for past and future pain and suffering and past and future loss of function of mind and body and Susan Stycket from making a claim for loss of consortium up to the time her daughter turns eighteen because they
Page 1 2 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|