Court Opinion

ID: 9406224
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-30 14:05:57.428225+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:28.074649
License: Public Domain

RENDERED: JUNE 23, 2023; 10:00 A.M.
                         NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

                Commonwealth of Kentucky
                          Court of Appeals
                             NO. 2022-CA-0272-MR

JACQUELINE CAUDILL                                                   APPELLANT

                 APPEAL FROM PULASKI CIRCUIT COURT
v.               HONORABLE TERESA WHITAKER, JUDGE
                        ACTION NO. 20-CI-00375

VILLAGER RESORT PROPERTIES,
LLC                                                                     APPELLEE

                                    OPINION
                                   AFFIRMING

                                  ** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: COMBS, MCNEILL, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES.

COMBS, JUDGE: This is an appeal from a premises liability action filed by

Jacqueline Caudill, an invitee, against Villager Resort Properties, LLC (Villager

Resort) in Pulaski Circuit Court. Villager Resort denied responsibility for her

alleged damages. The case was tried before a jury, which considered the evidence

and apportioned liability between the parties. Caudill was awarded $8,530.90 as

compensation for part of her medical expenses. However, the jury rejected her
claim for both future medical expenses and for pain and suffering. On appeal,

Caudill argues that the trial court erred by denying her motion for a new trial.

After our review, we are compelled to disagree. Hence, we affirm the judgment.

             On June 7, 2019, Caudill visited Villager Resort’s premises. She

walked up an exterior flight of wooden stairs, and after a time, she walked back

down again. As she approached the bottom third of the steps, a tread gave way.

Caudill slipped through the stairway to the ground beneath. She landed on her

feet, but she suffered scrapes and minor bruising to her right forearm, torso, and

thigh. Emergency medical services responded but did not provide treatment.

             Later that day, Caudill went to Lake Cumberland Regional Hospital’s

emergency room where she complained of pain in her right elbow and forearm.

The emergency room physician, Dr. Sean Rogers, noted that Caudill’s report of

pain was limited to “mid right forearm to the elbow.” He observed minor bruising

at Caudill’s right forearm. Her neck was not tender, and she exhibited full range of

movement. Dr. Rogers also observed that Caudill suffered with “superficial

abrasions” to the back of her right thigh. Dr. Rogers noted that Caudill was able to

walk easily and that she specifically denied wrist, neck, shoulder, and back pain.

Finally, Dr. Rogers observed “pain-free palpation full range of motion right wrist

hand and shoulder.” He diagnosed Caudill with right elbow strain and released

her.

                                         -2-
             Several days later, Caudill consulted with an attorney, who

recommended that she visit Fugate Family Chiropractic. Caudill first saw the

chiropractor on June 14, 2019. She described pain in her neck, mid-back, elbow,

and forearm. Upon examination, the chiropractor reported severe limitations to

Caudill’s range of motion at her upper and lower back. She was diagnosed with

muscle strain at her neck, thorax, and forearm. The chiropractor described pain or

stiffness in Caudill’s spine radiating to her shoulders and recommended a series of

spinal adjustments and right elbow adjustments over the course of one month.

Caudill left with ice packs.

             During a final evaluation conducted on August 28, 2019, chiropractor

Dr. Joshua Bakun assessed Caudill with an eight percent physical impairment

based upon “continued pain in the neck, middle back, right elbow, radiating pain,

muscular weakness, and non-uniform loss of range of motion.” He estimated that

Caudill would require “approximately $2,000 per year in palliative treatment.” He

referred her for an MRI, a neuro-surgical evaluation, and an orthopedic surgical

evaluation. Dr. Bakun explained that he referred Caudill to Dr. Jarosz for an

orthopedic surgical evaluation based upon recurring pain in Caudill’s elbow.

Caudill was billed $9,125.00 by Fugate Family Chiropractic. She eventually

underwent surgery performed by Dr. Jarosz.

                                        -3-
             On May 29, 2020, Caudill filed her civil action against Villager

Resort. After a period of pretrial discovery/practice, a jury trial was scheduled for

October 25, 2021.

             At trial, Caudill admitted that she suffered with neck and back pain

before her fall at Villager Resort in June 2019. She also explained that she

suffered a fall in her bathtub after June 2019, sustaining serious injury. Dr. Jarosz

performed her surgery thereafter. Caudill confirmed that she incurred substantial

debt associated with her chiropractic treatment by Dr. Bakun, who testified on her

behalf. Dr. Jarosz did not testify at trial.

             The jury returned its verdict on October 26, 2021. It awarded Caudill

$12,186.98 for her past medical expenses -- reduced by 30 percent based upon the

proportion of fault that it assigned to her. Caudill filed a timely motion for a new

trial.

             In her motion, Caudill argued that she was entitled to a new trial for

three reasons. First, she contended that Villager Resort improperly insinuated at

trial that Caudill’s personal injury claim had been “orchestrat[ed] by [her]

lawyers.” She argued that this tactic was unduly prejudicial and that it violated

public policy. She contended that the prejudicial effect of the tactic was made

evident by the jury’s decision to award her only a fraction of her medical expenses

and nothing for her pain and suffering.

                                           -4-
             Next, she argued that counsel for Villager Resort made an improper

reference to Caudill’s eligibility for Medicare benefits during closing argument.

She contended that this reference to a collateral source for payment of her

anticipated future medical expenses also violated public policy.

             Finally, Caudill argued that the trial court’s exclusion of medical

records relating to the surgery performed by Dr. Jarosz “had a prejudicial effect on

the jury.” Caudill explained that her testimony provided the primary evidence

linking the surgery to the personal injury that she sustained on Villager Resort’s

premises. She argued that the trial court’s refusal to permit the introduction of the

medical records related to the surgery caused the jury to discount her testimony

entirely. She contended that introduction of the disputed medical records could not

have prejudiced Villager Resort because it “could have deposed the doctor who

performed the surgery.”

             The trial court denied the motion. It noted that Caudill had raised no

objection at trial to the allegedly “salacious arguments” made by defense counsel

concerning the role of Caudill’s attorneys in “orchestrating” the litigation. It also

observed that she failed to provide the court with any references to the record -- or

even an example of any allegedly improper argument. It concluded that Caudill

waived any error.

                                          -5-
             The trial court also addressed Caudill’s contention concerning defense

counsel’s reference to Caudill’s eligibility for Medicare benefits. Again, it noted

that Caudill made no contemporaneous objection at trial. Nevertheless, it

concluded that there was no error because Caudill herself had opened the door to

this evidence by arguing to the jury that she would be unable to pay for future

medical care.

             Finally, the trial court addressed Caudill’s contention that it erred by

excluding the medical records pertaining to the surgery performed by Dr. Jarosz.

The trial court observed that it excluded the medical records -- in part -- because

Caudill needed a “physician to testify and to explain to the jury the extent of

[her] injuries and whether the injuries were the result of a fall through a set of

stairs or as the result of a fall as [Caudill] was getting out of her bathtub.”

(Emphasis added.) This appeal followed.

             On appeal, Caudill argues that the trial court abused its discretion by

denying her motion for new trial. Reordering her arguments, she first addresses

the allegedly improper exclusion of the medical records. She contends that the

trial court’s decision to exclude medical records related to her surgery constituted

palpable error resulting in manifest injustice. The nature and extent of the injuries

that Caudill sustained as a result of her fall at Villager Resort’s premises were

vigorously contested. Caudill testified that the injuries she sustained as a result of

                                           -6-
her fall at Villager Resort were so severe that she needed to undergo surgery.

Villager Resort contended that at least a substantial part of Caudill’s injuries was

sustained as a result of her fall in the bathtub -- after her fall on its steps. The trial

court concluded that there was a risk that the jury could be confused by the

admission of medical records related to Caudill’s surgery if no expert testified that

the surgery was required as a result of her fall at Villager Resort in June 2019.

                We review a trial court’s evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion.

Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Thompson, 11 S.W.3d 575 (Ky. 2000). An

abuse of discretion is shown by proving that the trial court acted in a manner that is

unfair, arbitrary, unreasonable, or unsupported by sound legal principles.

Commonwealth v. English, 993 S.W.2d 941, 945 (Ky. 1999).

                Even where it is relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative

value is substantially outweighed by the danger of confusion of the issues. KRE1

403. Under the circumstances, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by

excluding the medical records offered without sufficient explanation. Moreover, in

view of the evidence presented to the jury as to the nature and extent of Caudill’s

injuries, we cannot conclude that the outcome of the trial would have been

different if the excluded records had been admitted. CR2 61.01. We do not agree

1
    Kentucky Rules of Evidence.
2
    Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure.

                                            -7-
that the trial court’s decision to exclude the medical records constituted a palpable

error resulting in manifest injustice. The jury had substantial evidence before it

upon which to base its award of limited damages.

             Next, Caudill argues that she was deprived of a fair trial by defense

counsel’s suggestion to the jury that her claim was fabricated or exaggerated and

that the litigation was driven by her attorneys. Again, she argues that this alleged

error constituted palpable error resulting in manifest injustice.

             Defense counsel is free to elicit testimony that tends to cast doubt

about the validity and/or value of a plaintiff’s claims. The ability to do so is

integral to the art of litigation. Questions concerning the timing of Caudill’s

consultation with lawyers and the circumstances under which she came to treat

with Fugate Family Chiropractic were directly relevant to Villager Resort’s

argument that she may have exaggerated her physical condition, need for medical

care, and damages. There was no error, palpable or otherwise. The trial court did

not err by denying the motion for new trial on this basis.

             Finally, Caudill argues that the defense counsel’s reference to her

eligibility for Medicare benefits was improper. She again alleges palpable error

resulting in manifest injustice.

             However, when Caudill placed her financial hardship in issue, the trial

court properly concluded that Villager Resort was entitled to rebut the claim by

                                          -8-
showing that other financial means (i.e., Medicare benefits) were available to her.

The trial court did not err by concluding that Villager Resort was entitled to

challenge Caudill’s claim of financial distress where the jury might otherwise have

been misled. See Peters v. Wooten, 297 S.W.3d 55 (Ky. App. 2009). She had

opened the door for questioning as to her collateral source of income. There was

no error on this issue -- much less palpable.

             We affirm the judgment of the Pulaski Circuit Court.

             ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:                       BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:

Michael A. Johnson                         Bridget L. Dunaway
Justin W. Noble                            London, Kentucky
Hazard, Kentucky

                                         -9-