Case Name: Hazel PECKELS, Independent Executor/Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Peckels, Deceased, and Hazel Peckels, Individually, Respondents, v. WYATT FARMS, INC., Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2003-05-06
Citations: 112 S.W.3d 54
Docket Number: No. WD 60877
Parties: Hazel PECKELS, Independent Executor/Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Peckels, Deceased, and Hazel Peckels, Individually, Respondents, v. WYATT FARMS, INC., Appellant.
Judges: Before ELLIS, C.J., and LOWENSTEIN and HOWARD, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 112
Pages: 54–55

Head Matter:
Hazel PECKELS, Independent Executor/Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Peckels, Deceased, and Hazel Peckels, Individually, Respondents, v. WYATT FARMS, INC., Appellant.
No. WD 60877.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
May 6, 2003.
Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 1, 2003.
Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 26, 2003.
John L. Mullen, Keith A. Cary, Kansas City, for appellant.
Grant L. Davis, Thomas C. Jones, Scott S. Bethune, Timothy L. Brake, Kansas City, Daniel M. Kotin, Robert Bingle, Chicago, IL, for respondents.
Before ELLIS, C.J., and LOWENSTEIN and HOWARD, JJ.

Opinion:
Order
PER CURIAM.
Wyatt Farms, Inc. ("Wyatt"), appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict in a personal injury case in favor of Michael Peckels ("Michael") in the amount of $900,000 and for Hazel Peckels ("Hazel") in the amount of $125,000. Wyatt alleges the trial court abused its discretion in: (1) admitting the testimony of Dr. Savi-no, Michael's treating physician, regarding work expectancy; (2) admitting evidence regarding Michael's claim for loss of future wages pertaining to his part-time employment at his employer's loading dock; (3) admitting evidence regarding Wyatt's retention of Dr. Lowry Jones; (4) denying Wyatt's Motion for New Trial; and (5) denying Wyatt's Motion for Remittitur. Wyatt argues this court should reverse and remand the cause for a new trial.
Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).