Follett v. Jones, 5--5936
| Decision Date | 26 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 5--5936,5--5936 |
| Citation | 481 S.W.2d 713,252 Ark. 950 |
| Parties | Frank B. FOLLETT, Appellant, v. Vivian JONES, as Administrator of the Estate of Chauncy G. Jones, Deceased, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Jones & Segers, Fayetteville, for appellant.
Charles L. Gocio, Bentonville, Donald B. Kendall, Rogers, for appellees.
This is an action for wrongful death. The deceased, Chauncy G. Jones, was driving a pick-up truck when a collision occurred between it and a car driven by appellant. Jones sustained three nondisplaced broken ribs, contusions, abrasions, and a blow to his head as a result of the accident. He was taken to a hospital where he died 17 days later. Prior to the date of the accident, Jones had regularly worked at his job and, also, on his farm. However, it is undisputed that on the date of the accident, unbeknownst to the deceased, he had terminal cancer of the lung. The cancerous condition was discovered from the x-rays taken to determine the extent of the injuries to his chest. An autopsy report listed the cancer as the cause of his death. A jury found, as alleged by appellees, that appellant was negligent in causing the accident and that appellant's negligence was the proximate cause of Jones' death. The jury awarded $3,867.89 damages to Mrs. Jones as administratrix and $8,000.00 to her individually. Damages were disallowed to appellee, Harold Jones, decedent's son. From a judgment on that verdict the appellant brings this appeal.
We first consider appellant's assertion for reversal that the trial court erred in not directing a verdict in his favor as to the wrongful death because the evidence failed to establish that the 'accident was the proximate cause of the decedent's death.' Medical testimony from two physicians was presented to establish that the death was proximately caused by the accident. One of the doctors testified that 'the injuries received in the automobile accident hastened his death' and, further, the death was a result of 'a combination' of the injuries and the cancer. However, decedent would have eventually died of the cancer had the accident never occurred. The other medical expert testified: 'I believe that his injuries hastened his death.' This evidence when viewed most favorably to the appellees, as we must do on appeal, is sufficient to present a question of fact for a jury's determination as to whether the accident proximately caused Jones' death. Woodward v. Blythe, 249 Ark. 793, 462 S.W.2d 205 (1971); Ellsworth Bros. Truck Lines v. Mayes, 246 Ark. 441, 438 S.W.2d 724 (1969); see, also, Owen v. Dix, 210 Ark. 562, 196 S.W.2d 913 (1946).
We next consider appellant's contention that the jury's award for wrongful death is based upon speculation in that the record is void of any evidence relating to the 'period of time that the accident shortened the life span of the decedent.' Although the evidence as adduced is sufficient to present a jury question as to proximate causation, there is no evidence as to decedent's normal life span or otherwise from which the jury could determine the relative time span that this accident 'shortened' Jones' life. In the absence of such evidence the jury's award is without a reasonable basis and is, therefore, speculative. Kapp v. Sullivan Chev. Co.,234 Ark. 395, 353 S.W.2d 5 (1961). However, one expert witness was able to estimate medically the length of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jag Consulting v. Eubanks
...it was demanded by simple justice or where it was not impossible that the deficiency in proof could be supplied. Follett v. Jones, 252 Ark. 950, 481 S.W.2d 713 (1972); Southern Farm Bur. Cas. Ins. v. Gottsponer, 245 Ark. 735, 434 S.W.2d 280 (1968). In this case, it does not clearly appear f......
-
Womack v. First State Bank of Calico Rock, CA
...the appellee an opportunity to supply the defect. Pennington v. Underwood, 56 Ark. 53, 19 S.W. 108 (1892). See also Follett v. Jones, 252 Ark. 950, 481 S.W.2d 713 (1972); Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. Whitley, 10 Ark.App. 304, 664 S.W.2d 488 Because we are remanding this case, o......
-
Jag Consulting v. Eubanks
...it was demanded by simple justice or where it was not impossible that the deficiency in proof could be supplied. Follett v. Jones, 252 Ark. 950, 481 S.W.2d 713 (1972); Southern Farm Bur. Cas. Ins. v. Gottsponer, 245 Ark. 735, 434 S.W.2d 280 (1968). In this case, it does not clearly appear f......
-
Ivy v. Keith
...to the error indicated, the case must be retried, and upon a new trial, any deficiency of proof must be supplied. Follett v. Jones, 252 Ark. 950, 481 S.W.2d 713 (1972). However, I seriously disagree with the majority when it decides that it is the trial court's duty to serve Mr. Ivy with a ......
-
Doomed Steamers and Merged Fires: the Problem of Preempted Innocent Threats in Torts
...plaintiff's alcoholism and drug use was admissible for purposes of determining plaintiff's loss of earning capacity); Follett v. Jones, 481 S.W.2d 713, 714-15 (Ark. 1972) (limiting liability to actual life expectancy where defendant was responsible for the death of a man with terminal cance......