Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02879/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02879-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 

---

1

The Honorable Henry E. Autrey, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2879

___________

Terrie Elizabeth Ridpath; Lon *

E. Ridpath, *

*

Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern 

* District of Missouri.

Howard Lloyd Pederson; The *

Lakin Law Firm, P.C.; Ricky *

D. Foutch, *

*

Appellees. * 

___________

Submitted: April 11, 2005 

Filed: May 16, 2005 

___________

Before COLLOTON, McMILLIAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

___________

BENTON, Circuit Judge.

Terrie E. Ridpath and Lon E. Ridpath appeal the district court's1

 grant of

summary judgment in their personal injury suit. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291, this court affirms.

Appellate Case: 04-2879 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/16/2005 Entry ID: 1903112
-2-

This court reviews de novo the grant of summary judgment, giving the

Ridpaths the most favorable reading of the record and the benefit of any reasonable

inferences from the record. See Uhiren v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 346 F.3d 824,

827 (8th Cir. 2003). "Summary judgment is appropriate only when the pleadings,

depositions and affidavits submitted by the parties indicate no genuine issue of

material fact and show that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of

law." Id. In this diversity case, Missouri state law governs the substantive claims.

See Bennett v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc., 318 F.3d 868, 874 (8th Cir. 2003),

citing Erie R.R. Co. v. Tomkins, 304 U.S. 64, 78 (1938).

Howard L. Pederson entered the Ridpaths' property to serve process and came

into contact with Terrie Ridpath. The Ridpaths sued for battery, trespass, false

imprisonment, and loss of consortium – against Pederson, Pederson's employer (The

Lakin Law Firm P.C.), and the firm's client (Ricky D. Foutch).

 

Ridpath alleged that Pederson's torts aggravated her Crohn's disease, and

caused "other, unrelated" injuries. The district court granted summary judgment,

concluding that Ridpath did not offer the expert medical testimony required to prove

causation of the alleged injuries.

With respect to the Crohn's disease claims, Ridpath argues that under the

"sudden onset" doctrine, she may prove causation without expert testimony. Ridpath

contends this case is controlled by Berten v. Pierce, 818 S.W.2d 685 (Mo. App.

1991). In Berten, the Western District of the Missouri Court of Appeals applied the

sudden onset doctrine to find a submissible case of causation where a car accident

allegedly aggravated a pre-existing back condition. Id. at 686-87.

That doctrine holds that causation may be inferred by a lay jury, without

expert evidence, where the obvious symptoms of the injury follow the

trauma immediately, or with only short delay, and the injury is the kind

that is normally sustained in the kind of trauma being considered. The

Appellate Case: 04-2879 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/16/2005 Entry ID: 1903112
-3-

lay jury by its common sense and experience may reliably find that the

injury occurred as a result of the trauma. The most obvious cases for the

application of the doctrine are those where a person is involved in a

violent accident and sustains a broken bone, or an open wound. It has

also been applied in cases of back pain.

Id. at 686 (citations omitted).

The parties note a conflict among Missouri cases on whether aggravation of a

pre-existing injury is within lay understanding for purposes of the sudden onset

doctrine. CompareBerten, 818 S.W.2d at 687, with Rech v. AAA Plumbing Co., 798

S.W.2d 194, 196 (Mo. App. 1990), and Modlin v. Sun Mark, Inc., 699 S.W.2d 5, 7

(Mo App. 1985). This court need not address that question. Even assuming that

Berten is the law, Ridpath did not make a submissible case of causation. As Berten

states, the sudden onset doctrine applies "where the obvious symptoms of the injury

follow the trauma immediately, or with only short delay, and the injury is the kind

that is normally sustained in the kind of trauma being considered." Berten, 818

S.W.2d at 686. But "when the injury is a 'sophisticated' one, i.e., requiring surgical

intervention or other highly scientific technique for diagnosis, proof of causation is

not within the realm of lay understanding and must be established through expert

testimony." Turner v. Iowa Fire Equip. Co., 229 F.3d 1202, 1210 (8th Cir. 2000),

applying Soper v. Bopp, 990 S.W.2d 147, 157 (Mo. App. 1999).

True, Ridpath testified to an onset of increased Crohn's symptoms after the

incident. However, this is not a case where a "lay jury by its common sense and

experience may reliably find that the injury occurred as a result of the trauma."

Berten, 818 S.W.2d at 686. Unlike back pain after an auto accident, an aggravation

of Crohn's disease is not an injury a lay person understands normally to result from

a battery, trespass, or false imprisonment. Here, the alleged injury is sufficiently

sophisticated that Ridpath's doctor agreed "it has not been possible to correlate the

Appellate Case: 04-2879 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/16/2005 Entry ID: 1903112
-4-

development of disease with psychological disposition or exacerbations to stressful

life." Summary judgment was proper on the Crohn's disease claims. 

Ridpath further argues the district court erred in holding that without expert

medical testimony, she could not prove that Pederson's acts caused injuries unrelated

to her Crohn's disease. She alleges that Pederson's intentional torts caused "mental

suffering" that may be proved without expert testimony. This court affirms for a

different reason, and does not reach the state law issue. See Viking Supply v. Nat'l

Cart Co., 310 F.3d 1092, 1097 (8th Cir. 2002) (summary judgment may be affirmed

on any ground supported by the record, even if not relied upon by the district court).

Ridpath cannot prove "mental suffering" damages unrelated to Crohn's disease.

Defendants' Statement of Uncontroverted Material Facts number 22 says: "Plaintiff

Ridpath has admitted that all of her conditions, including feeling tired, worn out, and

depressed 'are 100 percent related strictly to the Crohn's disease.' Exhibit 3, Ridpath

Deposition, 33:2-34:14." Ridpath did not controvert Statement number 22. Local

Rule 7–4.01(E) (E.D. Mo. 2004) provides, "All matters set forth in the statement of

the movant shall be deemed admitted for purposes of summary judgment unless

specifically controverted by the opposing party." Because Ridpath effectively admits

that all of her conditions are related to Crohn's disease, summary judgment is proper

on her claim for "unrelated" mental suffering. See Harris v. Interstate Brands Corp.,

348 F.3d 761, 762-63 (8th Cir. 2003).

Summary judgment resolves all claims because Lon Ridpath's claim derives

from those of his spouse, and the claims against the employer and client are based on

respondeat superior. The judgment is affirmed.

_____________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2879 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/16/2005 Entry ID: 1903112