Summary
This Missouri Supreme Court opinion affirms a circuit court judgment in a wrongful death action following a fatal truck collision. The court addressed several appellate points, holding that defendants failed to preserve claims regarding the exclusion of expert testimony and the participation of separate counsel due to lack of timely objections and offers of proof at trial. Additionally, the court found substantial evidence supported the submission of jury instructions on failure to keep a careful lookout and sufficient evidence justified the award of aggravating circumstances damages against both the driver and his employer. Consequently, the judgment in favor of the plaintiffs was affirmed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether defendants preserved a claim of error concerning the exclusion of expert testimony.
- Whether defendants preserved a claim of error concerning joint participation by separate counsel.
- Whether Instruction 7 (failure to keep a careful lookout) was supported by substantial evidence.
- Whether the jury’s award of aggravating circumstances damages against Beck was supported by sufficient evidence.
- Whether the jury’s award of aggravating circumstances damages against Great Plains Trucking was supported by sufficient evidence.
Holdings
- Defendants did not preserve the issue for appellate review because they failed to offer proof of the expert testimony at trial and did not raise the objection in a motion for a new trial.
- Defendants preserved no claim because they never objected at trial and did not raise the issue in a new‑trial motion.
- The instruction was supported by substantial evidence; the jury could reasonably find Beck failed to keep a careful lookout.
- Sufficient evidence existed; Beck’s conduct showed complete indifference to safety, justifying the award.
- Sufficient evidence existed; Great Plains’ knowledge of and failure to correct Beck’s unsafe practices demonstrated conscious disregard.
Key quotations
“A motion in limine, by itself, preserves nothing for appeal.” (at 685)
“Whether the jury was properly instructed is a question of law that is reviewed de novo.” (at 294)
Factual background
Great Plains Trucking employee Lennis H. Beck was driving a tractor‑trailer at high speed in rain when he collided with the vehicle of Carrie S. Schultz, who was driving her son, Robert C. Schultz, Jr. The son died. The jury found the defendants negligent and awarded compensatory and aggravating damages.
Procedural history
The circuit court entered judgment for the plaintiffs based on a jury verdict awarding compensatory and aggravating damages. Defendants' post‑trial motion for a new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied. Defendants timely appealed.