Plaintiff Asserts Evidentiary Abuse of Discretion in Virginia Wrongful Death Case

The Virginia Supreme Court recently affirmed a lower court’s decision in a wrongful death claim stemming from a single-vehicle accident that took the lives of both occupants. According to the court’s opinion, the plaintiff, the administrator of the estate of one of the occupants, filed a lawsuit against several parties, including the other occupant of the vehicle. The lawsuit contends that the other occupant fell asleep at the wheel of his tractor-trailer, thereby causing the accident that killed the plaintiff. In response, the defendants argued that the plaintiff was the driver.

On appeal, the court reviewed several of the plaintiff’s arguments, including that the lower court erred in excluding portions of the medical examiner’s autopsy report and the plaintiff’s experts’ opinions regarding the driver’s identity. The plaintiff sought to introduce evidence from the Chief Medical examiner, where she concluded the cause of the defendant’s death was blunt force trauma. Her report relied on the police report to tell her who was driving the tractor-trailer in the case.

The plaintiff argues that under Virginia Code ยง 8.01- 390.2, medical examiner reports shall be received as evidence in court. Therefore, although the examiner’s report stems from her opinions based on the police report, it should be admissible. Statutory interpretation requires a court to review the plain language of a statute unless the terms are ambiguous. In this case, the court found that nothing in the statute provides that a medical examiner is permitted to make an opinion on an ultimate fact in issue. Further, the statute does not permit medical examiners to base opinions and facts from information garnered through lay testimony. Therefore, the court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the statute should be construed to admit the medical examiner’s opinion solely because the opinion is in a report.

Moreover, the plaintiff contended that the court abused its discretion in excluding the expert’s evidence. Generally, circuit courts maintain the discretion to admit or exclude expert testimony, and appellate courts will only reverse these judgments if the court abused its discretion. Here, the expert conceded that she could not reliably say whether the defendant was awake or asleep when the vehicle left the roadway or if he was experiencing any reactions to the medications found in his blood. Therefore, the appellate court found that the lower court exceeded their bounds or committed an abuse of discretion.

Have You Lost a Loved One a Virginia Accident?

If you recently lost a family member in a fatal Virginia accident, contact The Schupak Law Firm. Attorney Sidney Schupak is an experienced and tenacious trial attorney who has dedicated his career to advocating on behalf of and representing Virginia injury victims and their families. His office handles Virginia wrongful death cases stemming from medical malpractice, nursing home abuse, car accidents, and other forms of personal injury. Using his skills, knowledge, and resources, Attorney Schupak has recovered significant compensation amounts on behalf of Virginia accident victims. Contact his office at 240-833-3914 to schedule a free initial consultation to discuss your accident claim.


Contact Information