AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In January 2016, the Plaintiffs were involved in an automobile collision caused by the Defendant's vehicle drifting into their lane, resulting in multiple collisions and injuries to both Plaintiffs (para 3).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiffs: Argued that the automobile collision caused by the Defendant resulted in injuries, including a disk herniation affecting adjacent nerves for one Plaintiff and headaches caused by a neck injury for the other Plaintiff. They presented an orthopedic expert to support their claims (paras 3-4).
• Defendant: Contended that the Plaintiffs' medical bills included preventative care unrelated to the collision and that the total medical costs presented were inflated. The Defendant also disputed the Plaintiffs' account of the collision and challenged the admissibility of certain evidence and expert testimony presented by the Plaintiffs (paras 5, 8, 12, 15, 21).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred by excluding testimony from the Defendant's medical billing expert (para 8).
• Whether the district court erred by admitting exhibits summarizing the Plaintiffs' medical bills (para 12).
• Whether the district court erred by admitting testimony from the Plaintiffs' orthopedic expert witness (para 15).
• Whether the district court erred by admitting evidence that the Defendant's driver's license was expired at the time of the collision (para 21).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the jury verdict in favor of the Plaintiffs, finding no error in the district court's rulings on the issues raised by the Defendant (para 1).

Reasons

• BOGARDUS, Judge (DUFFY, Judge and YOHALEM, Judge concurring): The Court held that the Defendant failed to preserve the issue of the alleged exclusion of the medical billing expert's testimony and the issue of the admission of stipulated summary exhibits, as there was no objection or ruling on these matters recorded (paras 8, 12). The Court found no abuse of discretion in admitting the testimony from the Plaintiffs' orthopedic expert, as his training included specialized knowledge of nerve damage and function, making his testimony relevant and admissible (paras 15-20). Lastly, the Court determined that the Defendant did not preserve the issue of the admissibility of evidence regarding his expired driver's license for appeal, as he failed to object to this evidence at trial (para 21).