 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Womack Wholesale Supply3/29/2001
Appellee, Joe Gordwin, sued appellant, Womack Wholesale Supply, Inc., and Robertson Electronics, Inc. for personal injuries sustained when a wheel of Gordwin's tractor-trailer rig fell into a manhole on the concrete driveway of Womack's truck stop. Gordwin was a business invitee on Womack's premises; Robertson was an independent contractor that had performed work for Womack on its premises. Gordwin settled with Robertson before trial. A jury found that (1) Womack's negligence proximately caused Gordwin's injuries; (2) Gordwin's and Robertson's negligence, if any, did not; and (3) Gordwin sustained $190,000 in past damages, $140,000 in future damages, and $20,494.33 in past medical expenses. The trial court entered judgment on the verdict for Gordwin for $350,494.33. Womack asserts six points of error on appeal. We affirm.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Gordwin, a truck driver, was headed toward a diesel fuel pump as he drove his tractor trailer through the parking lot of Womack's truck stop. His rig rolled over two metal doors covering a rectangular manhole in the concrete driveway. Although the doors were designed to withstand the weight of a fully loaded tractor trailer, they collapsed as Gordwin drove over them, causing an impact to the truck when the rig's 40-inch-diameter left front wheel sank into the 46-inch-wide rectangular manhole. Gordwin, the only eyewitness to the event, testified that " he front wheel on the driver's side fell off [into the manhole] and popped right up," making a violent "pop." Gordwin testified that the force of the bump bent the bottom of his truck, and the damage "went all the way down to the axle." An investigation shortly after the accident disclosed that three of the four hinge pins that held the metal cover doors in place were missing. Gordwin awoke with pain in his back the morning after the incident. Medical tests showed that he had a herniated disk and slightly irritated nerves that caused pain in his legs, a condition that eventually required surgery. Gordwin sued Womack and Robertson on a premises liability theory, alleging that the dangerous condition created by the missing pins caused his injuries. Womack's corporate representative admitted at trial that none of Womack's employees had inspected the manhole cover doors, their hinges, or the hinge pins before the accident.
On appeal, Womack argues in six points of error that:
1) there was no evidence that Womack knew or should have known that the hinge pins to the manhole cover doors were missing, or that the doors posed an unreasonable risk of harm to Gordwin;
2) there was no evidence or insufficient evidence that Womack was the sole proximate cause of Gordwin's injuries (because of evidence that Robertson was responsible for the dangerous condition);
3) the trial court erred in excluding a definition of "new and independent cause" from the jury charge;
4) there was no evidence or insufficient evidence that Womack was the sole proximate cause of Gordwin's injuries (because of evidence that Gordwin's own negligence contributed to his injury);
5) the trial court erred in excluding evidence that Gordwin drove into the truck stop at an excessive speed; and
6) the evidence to support the jury's damage award was factually insufficient and against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence.
II. DISCUSSION
Four of Womack's six points of error are no evidence or insufficient evidence (against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence) complaints. We discuss these arguments first, addressing Womack's no evidence arguments before its factual sufficiency challenges. S
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|