McQueen v. Green

Topics

Practice areas

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred by omitting the final sentence of Illinois Pattern Jury Instruction Civil No. 50.01, which would have instructed that if the jury found Green not liable, it must also find Pan-Oceanic not liable.
2. Whether the jury's finding that Pan-Oceanic acted with reckless disregard while finding that Green was not negligent produced legally inconsistent verdicts.
3. Whether the absence of a specific burden-of-proof instruction for the negligence and willful-and-wanton claims deprived Pan-Oceanic of a fair trial.
4. Whether the absence of an issues instruction for the willful-and-wanton claim contributed to an unfair trial.
5. Whether the challenged errors required reversal and a new trial despite forfeiture or waiver.

Holdings

1. Once an employer admits liability under respondeat superior for an employee's conduct, the plaintiff may not proceed against the employer on alternative negligence theories, including negligent training, that are derivative of the employee's negligence. The employer's and employee's liability therefore rise and fall together in this case.
2. The trial court erred by giving an incomplete version of IPI Civil No. 50.01. Because Pan-Oceanic admitted agency and its liability was tied to Green's liability under the theories submitted, the jury should have been instructed that if it found Green not liable, it must also find Pan-Oceanic not liable.
3. The verdicts were legally inconsistent because the jury found that Green was not negligent while finding that Pan-Oceanic acted with reckless disregard, an aggravated form of negligence, even though Pan-Oceanic's liability was premised on respondeat superior. Legally inconsistent verdicts must be set aside and a new trial granted.
4. The jury was not adequately instructed on the burden of proof applicable to the specific negligence and willful-and-wanton claims. Although Pan-Oceanic forfeited the issue by failing to tender the proper instruction, the omission contributed to the incomplete and misleading instructions that prevented a fair trial.
5. The absence of an issues instruction identifying the material facts necessary to establish willful and wanton conduct compounded the instructional errors and contributed to the denial of a fair trial.

Key quotations

Factual background

On August 17, 2012, Pan-Oceanic employee Lavonta Green was directed to transport a skid steer on a flatbed trailer. Green noticed that the load appeared crooked or unsafe, but after communicating with a supervisor and Patten Industries personnel, he proceeded onto the highway. The load became unstable, Green lost control of the truck, and it collided with Fletcher McQueen's vehicle, injuring McQueen. Pan-Oceanic admitted that Green was its employee and that it was liable for Green's conduct under respondeat superior.

Procedural history

McQueen sued Lavonta Green and Pan-Oceanic after a collision involving a truck and improperly situated skid steer. After a bifurcated jury trial, the jury found against Pan-Oceanic but not Green, awarded $163,227.45 in compensatory damages, and later awarded $1 million in punitive damages against Pan-Oceanic. The circuit court denied Pan-Oceanic's posttrial motion, and Pan-Oceanic timely appealed. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Remand instructions

The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the matter is remanded for a new trial.