Hornady Transportation, LLC v. Gwendolyn B. Fluellen and Matkoski Fluellen

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 10/26/2012 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e Reporter of Decisions, Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 2100939 Hornady T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , LLC v. Gwendolyn B. F l u e l l e n and Matkoski Appeal from Monroe C i r c u i t (CV-09-99) PER CURIAM. Court 1 Hornady T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , judgment o f t h e Monroe L L C ("Hornady"), a p p e a l s Circuit Court awarding T h i s c a s e was r e a s s i g n e d on September j u d g e who a u t h o r e d t h e o p i n i o n . 1 Fluellen from a workers' 18, 2 0 1 2 , t o t h e 2100939 c o m p e n s a t i o n d e a t h b e n e f i t s and t o G w e n d o l y n B. Fluellen and the c o s t of f u n e r a l expenses Matkoski r e f e r r e d t o c o l l e c t i v e l y as t h e Fluellen (hereinafter "dependents"), widow and of Hornady's deceased employee, C h a r l e s F l u e l l e n The 2009, record Hornady seeking a i n d i c a t e s the filed a following. complaint determination of for i t s rights On ("Fluellen"). September declaratory and responsibilities benefits Fluellen was tried ("the widow") a n s w e r e d and under ("the son"). on November t e s t i m o n y , t h e r e was submitted parties, other to the the Act and Matkoski 17, 2010. Aside from the case widow's no l i v e t e s t i m o n y p r e s e n t e d ; t h e c a s e trial and herself F o l l o w i n g l e n g t h y d i s c o v e r y , the court upon t h e widow's t e s t i m o n y , witnesses, for counterclaimed, other the the stipulations documentary evidence. 2 We was the of note, t h a t compact d i s c s c o n t a i n i n g r e c o r d i n g s o f t h e d e p o s i t i o n s were evidence. of deposition testimony h o w e v e r , t h a t t h e d e p o s i t i o n s were r e c o r d e d and into 1975, ("the A c t " ) , f o l l o w i n g t h e d e a t h o f F l u e l l e n . Gwendolyn F l u e l l e n seeking 28, relief, u n d e r t h e A l a b a m a W o r k e r s ' C o m p e n s a t i o n A c t , A l a . Code § 25-5-1 e t s e q . son admitted 2100939 The p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d t h a t F l u e l l e n was wheel t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r in a d r i v i n g an t r u c k f o r H o r n a d y when he was single-vehicle collision i n North 18- involved C a r o l i n a ; that the widow and t h e son were F l u e l l e n ' s d e p e n d e n t s as d e f i n e d i n t h e A c t ; and was that, continued 9:20 determined t h a t the claim entitled to a v e r a g e w e e k l y wage o f $722.70 so l o n g as t h e y t o be h i s dependents or f o r a p e r i o d not exceeding shorter. e v i d e n c e i n t h e r e c o r d t e n d e d t o show t h e f o l l o w i n g . a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d on Sunday, May a.m. I t was the previous a.m. that presented of M i c h a e l in court weeks, w h i c h e v e r p e r i o d was The The trial c o m p e n s a b l e , F l u e l l e n ' s d e p e n d e n t s w o u l d be 66.667% of h i s 500 i f the undisputed two d a y s and day. The at t r i a l Wade. On t h a t F l u e l l e n had t h a t he only was had eyewitness contained the 4, 2008, a t day approximately not worked f o r begun d r i v i n g a t account of i n the d e p o s i t i o n i n question, Wade was the 6:00 crash testimony traveling t h e l e f t n o r t h b o u n d l a n e o f I n t e r s t a t e 95, n e a r L u m b e r t o n , North Carolina. Wade, a s t a f f s e r g e a n t i n t h e U n i t e d Army who served in testified by the wars i n both deposition that " h e a v y w i n d s " were b l o w i n g morning of F l u e l l e n ' s a c c i d e n t . 3 Iraq and States Afghanistan, In d e s c r i b i n g the the accident, 2100939 Wade said Interstate automobile, trailer front he was traveling 95 i n N o r t h C a r o l i n a , and t h a t driven Wade s a i d signaled i n the passing that f o r a lane lane of t h a t he h a d j u s t p a s s e d an he was p r e p a r i n g b y F l u e l l e n when o f him. Fluellen him that t o pass the t r a c t o r - F l u e l l e n changed lanes i n he d i d n o t remember w h e t h e r change b u t t h a t t h a t t h e change was " p r e p l a n n e d . " i t appeared t o Wade s a i d t h a t he h a d s p a c e a h e a d o f h i m , so he s l o w e d s l i g h t l y a n d c h a n g e d i n t o t h e right-hand lane. Wade s a i d t h a t a s he p a s s e d t h e t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r on t h e r i g h t s i d e , he n o t i c e d t h a t i t was t h e same s p e e d . As he drew p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r , Wade s a i d , he n o t i c e d "getting i n h i speripheral v i s i o n that t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k , the "entire truck median before t h e i m p a c t , he t u r n e d felt, vehicle and i m p a c t [ e d ] a t r e e . " a n d h e a r d an e x p l o s i o n . tractor-trailer, including engulfed o v e r a n d saw He said that just t o l o o k a t t h e r o a d b u t t h a t he o f fto the r i g h t side "completely he l o o k e d a s he [was] o f f the i n t e r s t a t e into the grassy saw, i t was f u r t h e r a n d f u r t h e r away f r o m h i m " a n d t h a t , drew e v e n w i t h that maintaining He s a i d t h a t he p u l l e d h i s o f t h e r o a d a n d saw t h a t t h e the i n flames." 4 cab of the truck, was 2100939 Wade t e s t i f i e d that he e x i t e d his vehicle, crossed the i n t e r s t a t e , and then s p r i n t e d toward t h e t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r . he a p p r o a c h e d , he s a i d , cab was a s e c o n d e x p l o s i o n . o f t h e t r u c k was c o m p l e t e l y therefore occurred He there said he was able that therefore split t o see t h a t b e h i n d t h e cab, had t h e second the second e x p l o s i o n " j u s t added t o t h e flames i t wasn't s i g n i f i c a n t t o him." i n his seatbelt, Fluellen that, heat he reached the flames, could have u n b u c k l e him and p u l l him from t h e s e a t . h e a t was " u n b e a r a b l e " to Fluellen. debris off Fluellen. in, Nonetheless, Fluellen just i f not f o r the Fluellen to However, Wade s a i d , a n d he was n o t a b l e t o move a n y Wade a t t e m p t e d t o remove B e c a u s e o f t h e h e a t , Wade s a i d , he r a n moved d e b r i s , a n d r a n b a c k o u t a g a i n . reach still on d e b r i s Wade t e s t i f i e d from was but the seat, with F l u e l l e n i n i t , b e e n e j e c t e d f r o m t h e c a b a n d was s i t t i n g closer explosion on t h e p a s s e n g e r s i d e o f t h e t r u c k . b e l o w Wade's e y e l e v e l . the The open, Wade s a i d , a n d When Wade r e a c h e d t h e c a b , he s a i d , strapped As three s a i d , he " j u s t c o u l d n ' t times, b u t because g e t t o him." 5 Wade a t t e m p t e d t o o f the flames, he He s a i d t h a t t h e d e b r i s 2100939 was on f i r e , F l u e l l e n ' s s e a t was on f i r e , a n d t h e c a b was on fire. Wade testified that he k e p t F l u e l l e n , who was c o m p l e t e l y making attempts c o v e r e d i n f l a m e s , b e c a u s e he saw F l u e l l e n m o v i n g a n d b e l i e v e d t h a t he was a l i v e . Fluellen was making slow movements d e s c r i b e d t h e movements, s a y i n g : free himself his with He s a i d t h a t h i s arms. He " I t l o o k e d l i k e an a t t e m p t t o o r t o move f r o m t h e a r e a he was i n . arms were s l o w l y to reach H i s head and m o v i n g i n an u p w a r d m o t i o n . " He a l s o s a i d t h a t F l u e l l e n ' s b o d y was m o v i n g i n t h e d i r e c t i o n t o w a r d where Wade was s t a n d i n g . Wade s a i d t h a t , a f t e r he a t t e m p t e d t o r e a c h F l u e l l e n t h e t h i r d t i m e , he n o t i c e d t h a t F l u e l l e n h a d s t o p p e d m o v i n g a n d t h a t h i s body went l i m p . longer a n y e f f o r t on F l u e l l e n ' s p a r t , Wade s a i d , he b e l i e v e d t h a t t h a t was when F l u e l l e n h a d d i e d . other When t h e r e was no Wade d i d n o t make a n y attempt t o approach F l u e l l e n . Soon t h e r e a f t e r , l a w - e n f o r c e m e n t o f f i c e r s , and emergency m e d i c a l t e c h n i c i a n s deposition stated that testimony, Lumberton firefighters, a r r i v e d on t h e s c e n e . police he a r r i v e d a t t h e c r a s h John Lynch a t 9:27 a.m. and p e r f o r m e d an i n v e s t i g a t i o n . He i d e n t i f i e d two w i t n e s s e s , Wade 6 site officer In 2100939 and Jason Covey, state trooper, report. who and had he previously given statements appended t h o s e s t a t e m e n t s t o h i s Covey s t a t e d : "At 9:20 a t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r go o f f t h e a.m. on a crash 5-4-08, I w i t n e s s e d road i n t o the median. caught f i r e immediately [ a f t e r i t h i t a t r e e ] . " the to The truck According to r e p o r t , Wade t o l d O f f i c e r L y n c h : " V i c t i m was t r a v e l i n g n o r t h b o u n d i n p a s s i n g l a n e a t m i l e m a r k e r 11 n o r t h o f e x i t 10. Victim gradually moved t o w a r d s t h e m e d i a n a t m a i n t a i n e d s p e e d and s t r u c k t r e e and v e h i c l e e x p l o d e d on i m p a c t . Victim was s t i l l a l i v e s l i g h t l y and some movement. Victim was t r a p p e d u n d e r s e a t b u t [ I ] was u n a b l e t o r e l e a s e him and p u l l f r o m w r e c k a g e . " Officer Lynch testified that the highway was straight l e v e l a t t h e s i t e where t h e t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r had and that the weather that day had O f f i c e r Lynch measured the d i s t a n c e had t r a v e l e d i n the f e e t ; he saw in grassy the F l u e l l e n had the median b e f o r e clear t h a t the i t struck median, and no attempted to veer the evidence and road sunny. tractor-trailer the no s k i d marks on t h e h i g h w a y , no tree s i g n of as 408 braking indicating that t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r back onto roadway. P a r a m e d i c Wadius W i l l i a m s a.m. been l e f t the and and was not allowed a r r i v e d on to approach the 7 the scene a t wreckage u n t i l 9:43 the 2100939 firefighters extinguished the f i r e an h o u r later. W h i l e he was w a i t i n g f o r t h e f i r e t o be e x t i n g u i s h e d , W i l l i a m s spoke t o bystanders who had gathered witnessed the crash. 50-year-old tried man a n d a woman flames to pull whether anyone h a d Two u n i d e n t i f i e d b y s t a n d e r s ( a 40- t o d e s c r i p t i o n ) responded. had and asked f o r whom W i l l i a m s The man t o l d W i l l i a m s [Fluellen] g o t up, f o r c i n g from p r o v i d e d no that "'they' t h e b u r n i n g cab b u t t h e them b a c k . " The e v i d e n c e i nthe r e c o r d i n d i c a t e s t h a t a f e m a l e w i t n e s s a t t h e s c e n e , who was never i d e n t i f i e d him, Fluellen, during that " l o o k e d c o n f u s e d , a s i f he h a d h i t h i s h e a d the impact." Fluellen asked o t h e r w i s e , t o l d W i l l i a m s t h a t , when s h e saw about The f e m a l e w i t n e s s a l s o was "moving t h e female some" after witness's told Williams the accident. statement that When Fluellen a p p e a r e d t o be c o n f u s e d , Wade s a i d t h a t he c o u l d n o t c o n f i r m her statement because he h a d n o t b e e n a b l e t o s e e F l u e l l e n ' s f a c e , w h i c h h a d been c o v e r e d by f l a m e s . However, he d i d s a y t h a t F l u e l l e n h a d a p p e a r e d t o be i n s h o c k a n d t o be m a k i n g an e f f o r t to free Dr. himself. Cynthia pathologist, Gardner, performed a an a u t o p s y 8 board-certified on F l u e l l e n ' s forensic body. Dr. 2100939 G a r d n e r t e s t i f i e d b y d e p o s i t i o n t h a t F l u e l l e n ' s body h a d b e e n charred on 1 0 0 % o f i t s s u r f a c e area. Dr. Gardner concluded, h o w e v e r , t h a t F l u e l l e n h a d n o t b e e n a l i v e when h i s body was burned i n the f i r e . findings. trachea, First, that during lined with a fire, on several e x p l a i n i n g that i f a person h i s or her airways w i l l a gray, sooty person breathes conclusion she n o t e d t h e a b s e n c e o f s o o t i n F l u e l l e n ' s esophagus, and b r o n c h i , is breathing be She b a s e d residue. normally N e x t , she s a i d , when a i n smoke, h i s o r h e r b l o o d cells attach to c a r b o n - m o n o x i d e m o l e c u l e s i n t h e smoke r a t h e r t h a n t o o x y g e n : she also high stated levels Fluellen's amount of level, Dr. Gardner Dr. Gardner coronary-artery as victims o f smoke i n h a l a t i o n have aortic-blood saturation that Finally, that carbon-monoxide h o w e v e r , was characterized determined revealed revealed having of a previous a saturation. less than 5%, an inconsequential. Fluellen had severe a t h e r o s c l e r o s i s , or hardening of the a r t e r i e s , w e l l as s c a r r i n g on t h e h e a r t indicative that as very 50% blockage, heart muscle t h a t , attack. a n d two b l o c k a g e s o f 9 0 % a n d 95%. a blockage of greater than 9 other she s a i d , was One c o r o n a r y coronary artery arteries Dr. Gardner s t a t e d that 7 5 % i n a n y one a r t e r y i s 2100939 considered severe sudden d e a t h . and i s thought sufficient to cause Dr. Gardner a l s o s t a t e d t h a t F l u e l l e n ' s h e a r t , w h i c h w e i g h e d 470 grams, was s a i d , t h a t he had high blood t o be "quite enlarged," indicating, she s u f f e r e d f o r years from i s c h e m i c d i s e a s e or pressure. However, Dr. Gardner acknowledged that none of her f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t F l u e l l e n had a c t u a l l y s u f f e r e d a h e a r t attack while driving. counsel, Dr. something other could have airways namely and On c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n by t h e d e p e n d e n t s ' Gardner than accounted the low acknowledged a fatal f o r the the possibility c a r d i a c event absence carbon-monoxide of before soot levels in in t h a t F l u e l l e n had d i e d i n a " f l a s h f i r e . " described a "flash f i r e " as that the Fluellen's his Dr. blood, Gardner follows: "A f l a s h f i r e [ i s ] ... an e x p l o s i o n , a v e r y h o t f i r e t h a t happens v e r y suddenly i n a s m a l l space. And t h e e f f e c t o f t h a t i s t h a t t h e p e r s o n who i s a l i v e and b r e a t h i n g i n a f l a s h f i r e i n h a l e s v e r y , v e r y h o t a i r w h i c h t h e n damages t h e i r a i r w a y , and i t damages i t by c a u s i n g i t t o s w e l l up, and t h e y b a s i c a l l y s m o t h e r , b u t i t k e e p s them f r o m g e t t i n g a l l t h e smoke and s o o t down i n t o t h e i r a i r w a y . So a t t h e t i m e o f t h e a u t o p s y , you d o n ' t see a n y t h i n g . You d o n ' t see s o o t l i n i n g t h e a i r w a y s a l l t h e way down, and t h e y d o n ' t have a h i g h c a r b o n - m o n o x i d e l e v e l because they d i e v e r y r a p i d l y from the superheated gases t h a t they've i n h a l e d . " 10 fire 2100939 Dr. minimal Gardner found blunt-trauma that Fluellen injuries i n the crash upper jaw and a f r a c t u r e d r i b was s u f f i c i e n t absence o f any e v i d e n c e breathing history t o cause death. a t the time Dr. G a r d n e r had sustained a only fractured n e i t h e r o f w h i c h , she s a i d , T h a t f i n d i n g , as w e l l as t h e i n d i c a t i n g that of the f i r e , had r e c e i v e d when F l u e l l e n had been combined w i t h concerning the t h e manner i n which F l u e l l e n ' s t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r had g r a d u a l l y d r i f t e d o f f the roadway, h a d t r a v e l e d i n a s t r a i g h t l i n e down t h e m e d i a n f o r more t h a n 400 f e e t , a n d h a d c r a s h e d i n t o a t r e e , w a r r a n t e d t h e conclusion, Fluellen's according death atherosclerotic was to Dr. Gardner, coronary-artery cardiovascular cause of i n s u f f i c i e n c y due to disease. d e a t h r e f l e c t i n g Dr. G a r d n e r ' s c o n c l u s i o n that A the certificate of was i s s u e d i n June 2008. Almost a year later, requested that o f f i c i a l s Examiner's office Fluellen's death i n the spring t h e widow i n the North C a r o l i n a Chief reopen and o f 2009, the conduct inquiry an into Medical the cause of investigation, based on e v i d e n c e t h a t , t h e widow m a i n t a i n e d , h a d n o t b e e n p r e s e n t e d t o Dr. G a r d n e r b e f o r e the preparation 11 of the autopsy report. Dr. 2100939 G a r d n e r h a d moved t o L o u i s i a n a , assigned the so t h e widow's r e q u e s t was t o D r . Samuel Simmons, a l s o a f o r e n s i c p a t h o l o g i s t i n Chief Medical Examiner's Wade's statement, Medical Services as w e l l office. as a Dr. Simmons report ("EMS") t h a t c o n t a i n e d made by obtained Emergency t h e s t a t e m e n t s made b y two u n i d e n t i f i e d b y s t a n d e r s t o W i l l i a m s , t h e p a r a m e d i c . reviewing those sources and c o n f e r r i n g w i t h h i s colleagues, Dr. Simmons d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n a l e v i d e n c e that Fluellen had been "moving and/or After suggesting responsive when [ e y e w i t n e s s e s ] a r r i v e d on t h e s c e n e " n e c e s s i t a t e d an amendment to the autopsy report Medical altering and t h e d e a t h c e r t i f i c a t e . Examiner's office t h e cause of death motor-vehicle incident with issued a supplemental t o "thermal fire," The C h i e f injuries a n d an report, due t o a amended death certificate. In h e r d e p o s i t i o n , Dr. Gardner acknowledged t h a t she had not seen t h e e y e w i t n e s s a c c o u n t s o f t h e a c c i d e n t a t the time she conducted t h e autopsy and d e t e r m i n e d t h e cause o f death. However, she s a i d , t h o s e a c c o u n t s , i n w h i c h t h e w i t n e s s e s s a i d that not F l u e l l e n a p p e a r e d t o be m o v i n g a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t , d i d establish that he was alive. 12 She stated that the 2100939 movements described were, "would expect a b u r n i n g i n her opinion, Gardner survive a also coronary discovered would not have F l u e l l e n was she as the But, course of 9, that his 2011, the the people said, may which Fluellen Gardner testified reports indicating that f i r s t reached d i e d as t h e result trial entered a arose out of and that the employment w i t h explosion d e a t h was and expenses i n the fire c a u s e d by to the amount o f $6,887. Hornady argues t h a t report H o r n a d y and " f a t a l thermal awarded d e a t h b e n e f i t s EMS court death Fluellen's cause of F l u e l l e n ' s court she Dr. known o f t h e w i t n e s s i n which arrhythmia, s t i l l a l i v e when t h e w i t n e s s e s March determining from that a heart flames. she him, of injuries. On the such w o u l d have c o n c l u d e d t h a t F l u e l l e n thermal type posture." however, i n an a u t o p s y . survived t h a t , i f she had conceded, event c a n n o t be the body t o p r o d u c e n o r m a l l y , " the muscles c o n t r a c t i n t o a " p u g i l i s t i c Dr. of the containing bystanders because, i t says, trial 13 in the medical resulting collision. dependents and The funeral Hornady a p p e a l e d . court statements those the injury" judgment of erred the in admitting unidentified s t a t e m e n t s were hearsay. 2100939 The dependents contend t h a t Hornady w a i v e d t h a t o b j e c t i o n stipulating to the alternative, they a d m i s s i b i l i t y of contend that the the EMS report. evidence by In the challenged by Hornady f a l l s w i t h i n e x c e p t i o n s to the h e a r s a y r u l e found i n R u l e 803(2) and Evid. 8 0 3 ( 4 ) , A l a . R. "'"'The standard applicable to a r e v i e w o f a t r i a l c o u r t ' s r u l i n g s on t h e a d m i s s i o n o f e v i d e n c e i s d e t e r m i n e d by two f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e s . The f i r s t grants t r i a l judges wide d i s c r e t i o n to exclude or to admit e v i d e n c e . ' " Mock v. A l l e n , 783 So. 2d 828, 835 ( A l a . 2000) (quoting W a l - M a r t S t o r e s , I n c . v. Thompson, 726 So. 2d 651, 655 (Ala. 1998)). Despite the l a t i t u d e a f f o r d e d the t r i a l c o u r t i n i t s e v i d e n t i a r y r u l i n g s , a t r i a l court exceeds i t s d i s c r e t i o n where i t a d m i t s p r e j u d i c i a l e v i d e n c e t h a t has no p r o b a t i v e v a l u e . See P o w e l l v. S t a t e , 796 So. 2d 404, 419 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 9 ) , a f f ' d , 796 So. 2d 434 (Ala. 2001). "'"'The s e c o n d p r i n c i p l e " i s t h a t a j u d g m e n t c a n n o t be r e v e r s e d on a p p e a l f o r an e r r o r [ i n the improper a d m i s s i o n of e v i d e n c e ] u n l e s s ... i t s h o u l d a p p e a r t h a t the error complained of has probably i n j u r i o u s l y a f f e c t e d s u b s t a n t i a l r i g h t s of t h e p a r t i e s . " ' " Mock, 783 So. 2d a t 835 ( q u o t i n g W a l - M a r t S t o r e s , 726 So. 2d a t 655, q u o t i n g i n t u r n A t k i n s v. Lee, 603 So. 2d 937, 941 (Ala. 1992)). See a l s o A l a . R.App. P. 45. "The b u r d e n o f e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t an e r r o n e o u s r u l i n g was p r e j u d i c i a l i s on t h e a p p e l l a n t . " Preferred Risk Mut. I n s . Co. v. R y a n , 589 So. 2d 165, 167 (Ala.1991).' 14 2100939 " M i d d l e t o n v. L i g h t f o o t , 885 So. 2d 1 1 1 , 113-14 ( A l a . 2003) (emphasis o m i t t e d ) . " Wood v. H a y e s , [Ms. 1100750, S e p t . 7, 2012] So. 3d , ( A l a . 2012) . Rule 803(2) p r o v i d e s t h a t startling under event or condition the stress condition" does Likewise, purposes medical of Rule of medical history, made w h i l e excitement not 803(4) "[a] statement caused constitute to a t h e d e c l a r a n t was by the event inadmissible provides that or hearsay. " [ s ] t a t e m e n t s made f o r diagnosis or treatment or past relating or present and d e s c r i b i n g symptoms, pain, or s e n s a t i o n s , o r t h e i n c e p t i o n o r g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e cause o r e x t e r n a l s o u r c e t h e r e o f i n s o f a r as r e a s o n a b l y p e r t i n e n t t o diagnosis hearsay. state or treatment" do not constitute inadmissible The A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e ' s n o t e s r e g a r d i n g R u l e 803(4) that the rule applies not only t o statements made t o p h y s i c i a n s , w h i c h had been t h e l a w b e f o r e t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e r u l e s o f e v i d e n c e , b u t a l s o t o s t a t e m e n t s made t o anyone whose participation diagnosis or or involvement treatment, i s necessary including 15 i n the process of hospital attendants, 2100939 ambulance d r i v e r s , Fed. R. E v i d . o r e v e n members o f t h e f a m i l y . 803(4) A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e ' s Regarding See a l s o , Notes. the a d m i s s i b i l i t y of hearsay pursuant 8 0 3 ( 4 ) , t h e Alabama C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s t o Rule stated: " I n d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a s t a t e m e n t comes w i t h i n this hearsay e x c e p t i o n , c o u r t s have a p p l i e d a 'two-pronged t e s t . ' The f i r s t prong ' i s the r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t t h e s t a t e m e n t must be one upon which medical personnel reasonably r e l y i n d i a g n o s i s and t r e a t m e n t . The s e c o n d p r o n g c o n s i s t s o f a requirement that the d e c l a r a n t possess a motive which i s consistent with the rule's underlying p u r p o s e ... [ o f ] s e e k i n g d i a g n o s i s o r t r e a t m e n t . ' M c E l r o y ' s Alabama E v i d e n c e § 261.02(4) (5th ed. 1996)." B i l e s v. S t a t e , An autopsy determine 715 So. 2d 878, 887 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 7 ) . i s "[a] medical t h e cause (9th ed. 2009). examiners of death." o f an i n d i v i d u a l . made responders, of a corpse t o B l a c k ' s Law D i c t i o n a r y Thus, when p e r f o r m i n g an a u t o p s y , are e s s e n t i a l l y witnesses examination medical " d i a g n o s i n g " what c a u s e d t h e d e a t h Our a n a l y s i s as t o w h e t h e r s t a t e m e n t s t h e to does 154 emergency not change personnel, because injuries sustained i n the accident. brought about the death are 16 just including the v i c t i m died The c i r c u m s t a n c e s as relevant EMS of that i n the 2100939 performance o f an a u t o p s y seeking t o diagnose In 1989), as t h e y a r e when p h y s i c i a n s a r e or treat the v i c t i m . McKenna v . S t . J o s e p h Hospital, 557 A . 2 d 854 ( R . I . a c a s e c i t e d f a v o r a b l y i n Dean Gamble's d i s c u s s i o n o f R u l e 803(4) i n M c E l r o y ' s A l a b a m a E v i d e n c e § 2 6 1 . 0 2 ( 2 ) ( 5 t h e d . 1 9 9 6 ) , t h e Rhode I s l a n d Supreme C o u r t r e v e r s e d a t r i a l c o u r t ' s decision had made to exclude statements that unidentified t o rescue personnel, who i n turn s t a t e m e n t s t o emergency-room p e r s o n n e l . bystanders conveyed those The r e s c u e p e r s o n n e l h a d r e s p o n d e d t o a c a l l t h a t a man h a d jumped f r o m an o v e r p a s s o n t o a h i g h w a y , c a u s i n g t h e man's d e a t h . 856. McKenna, The u n i d e n t i f i e d b y s t a n d e r s made s t a t e m e n t s t h e man's b e h a v i o r j u s t b e f o r e t h e i n c i d e n t . trial court's decision I s l a n d Supreme 557 A . 2 d a t regarding In reversing the t o exclude the statements, t h e Rhode Court e x p l a i n e d : "[T]he bystanders' statements come w i t h i n t h e e x c e p t i o n embodied i n Rule 8 0 3 ( 4 ) . The s t a t e m e n t s were made b y an i n d i v i d u a l t o e m e r g e n c y p e r s o n n e l w i t h no m o t i v e t o f a b r i c a t e o r l i e , d e s c r i b i n g w i t h particularity a specific situation. Also, the r e m a r k s were made t o emergency p e r s o n n e l a t t e n d i n g a c a l l f o r assistance i n order to f o s t e r treatment. T h e r e f o r e , t h e p r e r e q u i s i t e s o f R u l e 803(4) have been met, m a k i n g the statement[s] admissible hearsay." Id. a t 858. 17 2100939 I n t h i s c a s e , b y s t a n d e r s t o l d W i l l i a m s , t h e EMS p r o v i d e r who responded treating to the accident the injured, attempting t o move that scene f o r the purpose Fluellen immediately after had been alive the c o l l i s i o n . of and As i n McKenna, t h e b y s t a n d e r s i n t h i s c a s e h a d no r e a s o n t o l i e t o W i l l i a m s when t h e y d e s c r i b e d what h a d h a p p e n e d t o F l u e l l e n . Therefore, statements we conclude that the EMS containing o f b y s t a n d e r s who w i t n e s s e d t h e a c c i d e n t a n d i t s i m m e d i a t e a f t e r m a t h met t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s was p r o p e r l y a d m i t t e d p u r s u a n t t o t h a t We report note that the t r i a l court of Rule 803(4) a n d rule. admitted t h e EMS report pursuant t o Rule 803(2), the e x c i t e d - u t t e r a n c e s exception t o the hearsay r u l e . B e c a u s e we have c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e p o r t was p r o p e r l y a d m i t t e d p u r s u a n t determine t o Rule 8 0 3 ( 4 ) , we n e e d n o t w h e t h e r i t was p r o p e r l y a d m i t t e d p u r s u a n t t o Rule 803(2). "[An a p p e l l a t e c o u r t ] c a n a f f i r m a t r i a l c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t f o r any r e a s o n , e v e n one n o t c o n t e m p l a t e d by t h e t r i a l c o u r t . See T u r n e r v . Westhampton C o u r t , L.L.C., 903 So. 2d 82, 88 ( A l a . 2004) ('This C o u r t c a n a f f i r m a t r i a l c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t f o r any r e a s o n , b u t o n l y i f t h e r e c o r d on a p p e a l e v i d e n c e s the f a c t that i s the b a s i s f o r the a f f i r m a n c e . ' ( c i t i n g Ex p a r t e R y a l s , 773 So. 2d 1 0 1 1 , 1013 ( A l a . 2000)))." 18 2100939 C a r r o l l v. W.L. P e t r e y W h o l e s a l e Co., 941 So. 2d 234, 240 n. 6 ( A l a . 2006). M o r e o v e r , we n o t e that the witness statements t o which H o r n a d y o b j e c t s t e n d t o i n d i c a t e t h a t F l u e l l e n was s t i l l immediately a f t e r the accident. Those s t a t e m e n t s c o r r o b o r a t e Wade's t e s t i m o n y . From t h e r e c o r d , i t a p p e a r s t h e most c o m p l e t e and d e s c r i p t i v e and Fluellen's statements Wade's t e s t i m o n y . Therefore, r e p o r t had c o n s t i t u t e d e r r o r , not injuriously Accordingly, affected any s u c h Wood v. Hayes, Simmons's autopsy report error even of the accident him. The are cumulative of i f admittance o f t h e EMS t h a t e r r o r w o u l d p r o b a b l y have Hornady's substantial rights. w o u l d have b e e n h a r m l e s s . See a n d R u l e 45, A l a . R. App. P. that the t r i a l opinion t h a t Wade gave t o rescue witnesses So. 3d a t Hornady argues Dr. statement movements as Wade t r i e d of the u n i d e n t i f i e d alive testimony, a n d t h e amended court erred i n admitting as w e l l death a s t h e amended certificate--all of w h i c h , i t s a y s , were p r e m i s e d upon t h e a l l e g e d l y i n a d m i s s i b l e hearsay statements. witness statements However, a s d i s c u s s e d , t h e EMS r e p o r t a n d were p r o p e r l y a d m i t t e d i n t o 19 evidence. 2100939 To the that Hornady statements witness extent were not factually H o r n a d y c o n t e n d s , F l u e l l e n was trailer he was argues that correct d r i v i n g t r a v e l e d o f f the opinion, opinion testimony i . e . , the death c e r t i f i c a t e , amended challenged because, a l r e a d y d e a d when t h e or inadmissible. does n o t r e n d e r Dr. memorializing his report and the court, in as testimony the action, trier regarding In the the this context e m p l o y e r had of and i t was fact, to amended However, as d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s o p i n i o n , t h e c a u s e o f F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h was dispute tractorthe documents autopsy the as interstate into m e d i a n and s t r u c k a t r e e , s u c h a c h a l l e n g e Simmons's the duty reconcile of the later the p r i m a r y the trial conflicting what c a u s e d F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h . of a w o r k e r s ' compensation case i n which challenged the testimony of two physicians r e g a r d i n g t h e c a u s e o f an e m p l o y e e ' s i n j u r i e s , t h i s c o u r t that " ' [ i ] t i s w e l l s e t t l e d t h a t any c h a l l e n g e t o t h e f a c t s upon w h i c h an e x p e r t b a s e s h i s o p i n i o n goes t o the weight, r a t h e r than the a d m i s s i b i l i t y , of the evidence. Dyer v. T r a e g e r , 357 So. 2d 328, 330 (Ala. 1978).' B a k e r v. E d g a r , 472 So. 2d 968, 970 ( A l a . 1985) . See a l s o F o r t James O p e r a t i n g Co. v. K i r k l e w s k i , 893 So. 2d 434, 439 (Ala. Civ. App. 2 0 0 4) ; I n d e p e n d e n t L i f e & A c c i d e n t I n s . Co. v. H a r r i n g t o n , 658 So. 2d 892, 898 ( A l a . 1 9 9 4 ) ; and 20 held 2100939 A l a b a m a Power Co. (Ala. 1988)." M i l l r y M i l l Co. v. Courtney, v. M a n u e l , 999 So. 539 2d 508, So. 518 2d 170, 173 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). As t o t h e a d m i s s i b i l i t y o f t h e amended a u t o p s y r e p o r t the amended d e a t h certificate, " ' [ b ] o t h A l a b a m a and f e d e r a l c a s e l a w have r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e business records exception i s a f i r m l y rooted exception to the hearsay r u l e . See, e.g., McNabb v. S t a t e , 887 So. 2d 929, 969 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 20 0 1 ) ; O h i o v. R o b e r t s , 448 U.S. [56] a t 66 n. 8, 100 S.Ct. 2531 [(1980)]. Moreover, under Alabama law, "An autopsy report made in the r e g u l a r course of b u s i n e s s is admissible under the business records exception." 2 C h a r l e s W. Gamble, McElroy's Alabama E v i d e n c e § 254.01(18) ( 5 t h ed. 1996) (footnote omitted). See a l s o Adams v. S t a t e , 955 So. 2d 1037, 1072-73 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 3 ) ; B a k e r v. S t a t e , 473 So. 2d 1127, 1129 (Ala. Crim. App. 1984). The results of Dr. Embry's autopsy and the s u p p o r t i n g m a t e r i a l s are business r e c o r d s , which bear the earmark of r e l i a b i l i t y or p r o b a b i l i t y of t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s and f u r t h e r t h e " ' i n t e g r i t y of the fact-finding p r o c e s s , ' " see Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1020, 108 S.Ct. 2798, 101 L.Ed.2d 857 (1988) (quoting 21 and 2100939 K e n t u c k y v. S t i n c e r , 482 U.S. 730, 736, 107 S . C t . 2658, 96 L.Ed.2d 631 (1987)) ' " [ P e r k i n s v. S t a t e , ] 897 So. 2d [457] a t 463-65 [ ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 4 ) ] . See G o b b l e v. S t a t e , [Ms. CR-05-0225, F e b r u a r y 5, 2010] So. 3d (Ala. C r i m . App. 2 0 1 0 ) ; S h a r i f i v. S t a t e , 993 So. 2d 907 (Ala. C r i m . App. 2 0 0 8 ) . " Thompson v. S t a t e , , [Ms. CR-05-0073, Feb. 17, 2012] ( A l a . C r i m . App. So. 3d 2012). B a s e d on t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e u s , we c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e t r i a l court properly opinion amended allowed D r . Simmons's t e s t i m o n y regarding h i s as t o t h e c a u s e o f F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h , as w e l l as t h e autopsy r e f l e c t i n g that report and amended death certificate opinion. H o r n a d y a r g u e s t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d by f i n d i n g t h a t F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h was p r o x i m a t e l y out c a u s e d by an a c c i d e n t arising o f a n d i n t h e c o u r s e o f h i s employment w i t h H o r n a d y . contends that [Fluellen's] d e a t h was which occurred In standard "the only compensation evidence this demonstrates c a u s e d by an i d i o p a t h i c h e a r t p r i o r to the a c t u a l the A c t , the that legal legislature court must cases. 22 It that attack collision." set forth apply the following i n reviewing workers' 2100939 " (e) R e v i e w . From an o r d e r o r j u d g m e n t , any a g g r i e v e d p a r t y may, w i t h i n 42 days thereafter, a p p e a l t o t h e C o u r t o f C i v i l A p p e a l s and r e v i e w s h a l l be as i n c a s e s r e v i e w e d as f o l l o w s : "(1) I n r e v i e w i n g t h e s t a n d a r d o f p r o o f s e t f o r t h h e r e i n and o t h e r l e g a l issues, r e v i e w by the Court of Civil A p p e a l s s h a l l be w i t h o u t a p r e s u m p t i o n o f correctness. "(2) I n r e v i e w i n g p u r e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , the f i n d i n g of the c i r c u i t c o u r t s h a l l n o t be r e v e r s e d i f t h a t f i n d i n g i s s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . " § 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( e ) , A l a . Code 1975. " S u b s t a n t i a l evidence i s '"evidence of such w e i g h t and q u a l i t y t h a t f a i r - m i n d e d p e r s o n s i n t h e e x e r c i s e o f i m p a r t i a l j u d g m e n t can r e a s o n a b l y i n f e r the e x i s t e n c e o f t h e f a c t s o u g h t t o be p r o v e d . " ' Ex p a r t e T r i n i t y I n d u s . , I n c . , 680 So. 2d 262, 268 ( A l a . 1996) ( q u o t i n g West v. F o u n d e r s L i f e A s s u r a n c e Co. o f F l o r i d a , 547 So. 2d 870, 871 ( A l a . 1 9 8 9 ) ) . " White Tiger (Ala. C i v . App. The G r a p h i c s , I n c . v. 88 So. court must 3d 908, of the trial be based o f t h e e v i d e n c e . § 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( c ) , A l a . Code A preponderance 910 2012). decision preponderance Clemons, of the evidence i s d e f i n e d as "[t]he greater weight of the evidence, not n e c e s s a r i l y e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e g r e a t e r number o f w i t n e s s e s t e s t i f y i n g t o a f a c t b u t by e v i d e n c e t h a t has t h e most c o n v i n c i n g f o r c e ; s u p e r i o r e v i d e n t i a r y weight t h a t , though not s u f f i c i e n t t o f r e e the mind wholly from a l l reasonable doubt, is still 23 on a 1975. 2100939 s u f f i c i e n t t o i n c l i n e a f a i r and i m p a r t i a l mind t o one s i d e o f t h e i s s u e r a t h e r t h a n t h e o t h e r . " Black's Law D i c t i o n a r y 1301 ( 9 t h e d . 2 0 0 9 ) . Hornady's indicated accident that statement that Fluellen died i s simply the only of a heart not supported "legal attack evidence" before the by t h e r e c o r d . B o t h Dr. G a r d n e r a n d D r . Simmons t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t s a y t o a reasonable degree died of a heart attack, before before of medical certainty that F l u e l l e n had a t t a c k , o r t h a t he h a d e v e n s u f f e r e d a h e a r t the accident us, a determination happened. that Based on t h e r e c o r d F l u e l l e n died of a heart a t t a c k w o u l d be m e r e l y s p e c u l a t i v e . Contrary record said tending that Fluellen was t o Hornady's a s s e r t i o n , t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e i n t h e that t o support the t r i a l as he was p r e p a r i n g changed l a n e s . the lane court's t o pass Wade t e s t i f i e d change was i n d i c a t e t h a t F l u e l l e n was s t i l l Wade d i d n o t s e e b u t f e l t t o the shoulder conscious the f i r s t toward the accident t o a s s i s t F l u e l l e n . Wade truck, that h i s impression which at that explosion, would time. when t h e He p u l l e d h i s v e h i c l e of the i n t e r s t a t e , 24 Fluellen's "preplanned," t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r c o l l i d e d with thetree. off judgment. and then r a n back The s e c o n d explosion 2100939 o c c u r r e d t o w a r d t h e b a c k o f t h e t r u c k a s Wade a p p r o a c h e d . cab h a d a l r e a d y b e e n s p l i t open, a n d F l u e l l e n , s t i l l i n h i s seat by h i s s e a t b e l t , the was "unbearable" strapped h a d been e j e c t e d from t h e cab by time t h e second e x p l o s i o n made t h r e e a t t e m p t s t o r e a c h The occurred. Wade s a i d t h a t he F l u e l l e n , b u t , he s a i d , t h e h e a t a n d he " j u s t couldn't get t o him." Wade t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e r e a s o n he k e p t t r y i n g t o r e a c h F l u e l l e n was b e c a u s e he saw F l u e l l e n m o v i n g a n d b e l i e v e d t h a t he was a l i v e . Wade d e s c r i b e d F l u e l l e n ' s movements, s a y i n g : " I t looked like an a t t e m p t t o f r e e h i m s e l f o r t o move f r o m t h e a r e a he was i n . H i s h e a d a n d h i s arms were s l o w l y m o v i n g i n an u p w a r d m o t i o n . " He also said that Fluellen's toward where b o d y was m o v i n g i n t h e d i r e c t i o n Wade was s t a n d i n g . attempted t o reach Fluellen Wade the t h i r d said time, that after he n o t i c e d F l u e l l e n h a d s t o p p e d m o v i n g a n d t h a t h i s body went l i m p . t h e r e was no l o n g e r a n y e f f o r t on F l u e l l e n ' s he he that When p a r t , Wade s a i d , b e l i e v e d t h a t t h a t was when F l u e l l e n h a d d i e d . Wade d i d n o t make a n o t h e r a t t e m p t t o a p p r o a c h F l u e l l e n . H o r n a d y ' s argument n e c e s s a r i l y g i v e s more w e i g h t t o D r . G a r d n e r ' s o p i n i o n t h a t what Wade--and what o t h e r w i t n e s s e s t o the a c c i d e n t - - s a w was n o t v o l u n t a r y 25 movement on t h e p a r t o f 2100939 F l u e l l e n , but a c o n t r a c t i n g of the muscles i n t o a form. "pugilistic" " I t i s r u d i m e n t a r y t h a t i f the m a t t e r at i s s u e i s s o l e l y w i t h i n the testimony on the consideration." 809-10 knowledge of e x p e r t s , subject competent F o r d L i f e I n s . Co. ( A l a . C i v . App. the t r i a l is 1979). c o u r t , as t h e then a l a y for witness's the v. S m i t h , 369 jury's So. I t i s w i t h i n the not 2d 808, province of f i n d e r of f a c t i n t h i s case, to weigh Dr. G a r d n e r ' s o p i n i o n t e s t i m o n y r e g a r d i n g w h e t h e r F l u e l l e n was a c t u a l l y moving a g a i n s t the F l u e l l e n ' s movements, saw t e s t i m o n y o f Wade, who h i s body "go limp," and t h a t as t h e t i m e he b e l i e v e d t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d . trial 441 3d trial E l i t e Transp. Servs. ( A l a . C i v . App. 909, court 925 benefit 1997)." ( A l a . C i v . App. v. Humphreys, 690 C a s e c o , LLC 2010). v. of the the record statements, d e t e r m i n e d t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d as a r e s u l t o f i n s u f f i c i e n c y due Dingman, 65 the Id. Dr. having Gardner coronary-artery to a t h e r o s c l e r o t i c c a r d i o v a s c u l a r 26 by 2d indicates that, without witnesses' the So. I t i s the duty of to r e c o n c i l e c o n f l i c t i n g testimony. Additionally, the "Although a w i t n e s s e s p r e s e n t e d by t h e p a r t i e s , i t i s n o t b o u n d that testimony. So. pinpointed c o u r t i s c e r t a i n l y f r e e to b e l i e v e the t e s t i m o n y of expert 439, observed disease. 2100939 She said that there was no way to t e l l i f F l u e l l e n had e x p e r i e n c e d an a r r h y t h m i a , b e c a u s e i t l e a v e s no s i g n , b u t , i n her opinion, Fluellen's asked death was whether caused the by a coronary "coronary event." When disease she discovered i n F l u e l l e n n e c e s s a r i l y meant t h a t he w o u l d have had a s u d d e n d e a t h , Dr. G a r d n e r r e s p o n d e d : " I t j u s t means t h a t he Moreover, [was] a t Fluellen had risk f o r sudden suffered some that, death." type of "coronary although even i f event," i t would Dr. have been Gardner acknowledged possible that F l u e l l e n may have s u r v i v e d believed that "the f i r e saved." She f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t , i f she h a d known o f t h e such w o u l d have p r e v e n t e d an e v e n t , him from she being w i t n e s s r e p o r t s , she w o u l d have c o n c l u d e d t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d as t h e r e s u l t o f t h e r m a l As flash mentioned, fire would both account injuries. Dr. G a r d n e r a n d Dr. Simmons f o r the lack of evidence said a of i n h a l a t i o n and t h a t t h e absence o f s o o t i n F l u e l l e n ' s soot lungs d i d n o t mean t h a t he n e c e s s a r i l y d i e d as t h e r e s u l t o f a h e a r t attack o r t h a t he was d e a d b e f o r e t h e c o l l i s i o n . hot f l a s h f i r e , both doctors t e s t i f i e d , p r e v e n t smoke o r s o o t f r o m e n t e r i n g 27 In a very t h e a i r w a y s s w e l l and the airway. Dr. Simmons 2100939 s a i d t h a t , " b a s e d on d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h t h e s e n i o r p a t h o l o g i s t , we felt likely like [ d e a t h c a u s e d by t h e r m a l i n j u r i e s ] scenario g e n t l e m a n had given the eyewitness was account a p p a r e n t l y b e e n m o v i n g and t h e most that responsive although somewhat c o n f u s e d a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l w r e c k o c c u r r e d b u t t h e t r u c k was This engulfed i n flames." is a e v i d e n c e , we may the i n t e r s t a t e difficult never Gardner and Dr. before 2 Based know what c a u s e d i n t o the median. Fluellen's death not Dr. case. this on the available F l u e l l e n to drive o f f However, i t i s t h e c a u s e o f t h e c a u s e o f t h e a c c i d e n t - - t h a t i s key. Simmons d i d n o t agree on the cause of F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h , a l t h o u g h i n h e r t e s t i m o n y , as m e n t i o n e d , Dr. G a r d n e r w a v e r e d on court to weigh the the p o i n t . evidence I t i s the presented and duty to of the make trial factual D r . Simmons's s t a t e m e n t t h a t t h e r e were w i t n e s s e s who saw Fluellen after the impact but before the flames is i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e w i t n e s s e s ' s t a t e m e n t s t h a t F l u e l l e n and t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k were i m m e d i a t e l y e n g u l f e d i n f l a m e s . However, s u c h a m i s s t a t e m e n t i s i n s u f f i c i e n t , i n l i g h t o f a l l t h e e v i d e n c e , t o t o t a l l y d i s r e g a r d Dr. Simmons's o p i n i o n as t o the cause of F l u e l l e n ' s death. I n f a c t , b e c a u s e Wade's t e s t i m o n y was t h a t t h e cab was i m m e d i a t e l y e n g u l f e d i n f l a m e s , even b e f o r e the second e x p l o s i o n , the e v i d e n c e tends to support the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d of thermal i n j u r i e s resulting f r o m a f l a s h f i r e more s t r o n g l y t h a n i f Dr. Simmons's m i s s t a t e m e n t h a d b e e n c o r r e c t . 2 28 2100939 f i n d i n g s b a s e d on t h a t e v i d e n c e . The l e g i s l a t u r e has p r o v i d e d that, cases, i n workers' factual findings compensation shall s u b s t a n t i a l evidence. not be the c i r c u i t reversed court's i f supported by § 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( e ) , A l a . Code 1975. I n t h i s c a s e , t h e e v i d e n c e i n t h e r e c o r d i n c l u d e s Wade's d e s c r i p t i o n of the accident, explosions; to them the witnesses' t o be statements t h a t F l u e l l e n appeared the c o l l i s i o n ; the the type of i n j u r i e s immediately that thermal injuries after can be s u f f e r e d i n a f l a s h Simmons's u l t i m a t e c o n c l u s i o n of and t h e o f b o t h Dr. Simmons and Dr. G a r d n e r r e g a r d i n g testimony alive i n c l u d i n g the c o l l i s i o n he Dr. t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d as a r e s u l t suffered amended d e a t h c e r t i f i c a t e fire; i n the c o l l i s i o n ; r e f l e c t i n g thermal From this and t h e injuries cause of F l u e l l e n ' s death. evidence, the court c o u l d h a v e d e t e r m i n e d t h a t i t was more l i k e l y as t h e trial than not t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e e x p l o s i o n and r e s u l t i n g fire, and conclude not from that a "coronary the record support of the t r i a l event." contains court's Accordingly, we s u b s t a n t i a l evidence in f i n d i n g s of f a c t . H o r n a d y a r g u e s t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d by a w a r d i n g t h e d e p e n d a n t s more t h a n $3,000 f o r b u r i a l e x p e n s e s . 29 Pursuant t o 2100939 § 25-5-67, A l a . Code 1975, t h e maximum amount an e m p l o y e r i s r e q u i r e d t o pay f o r b u r i a l expenses i n a w o r k e r s ' compensation c a s e i s $3,000. to rebut t h i s authority amount. We n o t e t h a t t h e d e p e n d e n t s made no i s s u e on a p p e a l . that would Accordingly, allow Our r e s e a r c h the t r i a l we h o l d court that the t r i a l argument has r e v e a l e d to exceed court no that erred i n a w a r d i n g t h e d e p e n d e n t s " f u n e r a l e x p e n s e s " o f $6,887. For the reasons s e t f o r t h of t h e judgment a b o v e , we r e v e r s e awarding the dependants burial that portion expenses i n e x c e s s o f t h e maximum amount a l l o w e d b y s t a t u t e ; we remand t h e cause f o r an a w a r d opinion. of b u r i a l expenses The r e m a i n d e r o f t h e j u d g m e n t AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED consistent with i s affirmed. IN PART; AND REMANDED. Thompson, P . J . , a n d B r y a n a n d Thomas, J J . , c o n c u r . Pittman, Moore, J . , dissents, with J . , recuses himself. 30 writing. this 2100939 PITTMAN, J u d g e , d i s s e n t i n g . I r e s p e c t f u l l y d i s s e n t b e c a u s e I do n o t b e l i e v e t h a t dependents satisfied preponderance of the their burden evidence, see of Ala. proving, Code 1975, 8 1 ( c ) , t h a t t h e c a u s e o f C h a r l e s F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h was i n j u r i e s due to a motor-vehicle H o r n a d y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , LLC, Dr. Samuel official Simmons's incident with by § 25-5- "thermal fire." cause-of-death opinion (and on two the and t h a t t h e y were i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e u n d i s p u t e d the case. the challenged Fluellen's death c o u r t o v e r r u l e d the evidence, was and an accident I b e l i e v e t h a t the t r i a l on Dr. case, even contained assuming i n t h e EMS the under A l a . Code c o u r t e r r e d i n a d m i t t i n g and Simmons's o p i n i o n b e c a u s e t h a t o p i n i o n was f a c t u a l p r e m i s e t h a t was u n s u p p o r t e d by any admissibility of report. 31 admitted determined compensable W o r k e r s ' C o m p e n s a t i o n A c t , § 25-5-51 e t s e q . , report f a c t s of objection, ultimately that the 1975. relying b a s e d on evidence i n the two grounds: t h a t t h e y were b a s e d on h e a r s a y s t a t e m e n t s i n t h e EMS trial a o b j e c t e d to the a d m i s s i o n of documents d e r i v e d f r o m t h a t o p i n i o n ) The the a the statements 2100939 It i s undisputed that, i n deciding whether to amended a u t o p s y r e p o r t and d e a t h c e r t i f i c a t e , his colleagues been based. p e r f o r m a new Simmons a c c e p t e d t h e p h y s i c a l f i n d i n g s and t o x i c o l o g i c a l t e s t s upon w h i c h Dr. r e p o r t had Dr. That i s t o say, autopsy. Gardner's autopsy but Cynthia He issue and r e s u l t s of Gardner's Dr. an autopsy Simmons d i d not a c c e p t e d the data d e r i v e d from Dr. determined that a d i f f e r e n t conclusion as t o t h e c a u s e o f F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h s h o u l d be drawn f r o m t h a t data, b a s e d s o l e l y upon w i t n e s s a v a i l a b l e t o Dr. s t a t e m e n t s t h a t had G a r d n e r when she i s s u e d her Because the s c i e n t i f i c data u n d e r p i n n i n g r e p o r t were n o t i n d i s p u t e , any new not that data. Dr. Three autopsy conclusion, median findings were cause consistent was data. are t h e d e b r i s f r o m t h e w r e c k a g e was the report. however, pertinent to the F i r s t , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k was in been Dr. G a r d n e r ' s a u t o p s y w o u l d have t o be Simmons's new c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the autopsy c o n c l u s i o n about the o f F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h , t o be v a l i d , with not burning, burning, and analysis. burning, t h e g r a s s and Fluellen's own shrubs body was b u r n i n g when M i c h a e l Wade and t h e b y s t a n d e r s saw him, F l u e l l e n did not breathe i n the products 32 of combustion -- soot and 2100939 carbon monoxide. Second, Fluellen sustained, the blunt-trauma injuries that e i t h e r i n the i n i t i a l impact or i n b e i n g e j e c t e d f r o m t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k a f t e r t h e s e c o n d were n o t s u f f i c i e n t explosion, i n themselves t o cause F l u e l l e n ' s death. T h i r d , F l u e l l e n s u f f e r e d from c o r o n a r y - a r t e r y atherosclerosis; he had b l o c k a g e s o f 50%, 90%, and 95%, r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n t h r e e c o r o n a r y a r t e r i e s ; t h e l a t t e r two b l o c k a g e s were s u f f i c i e n t t o cause immediate death. The autopsy conclusively established that not breathed i n the products of combustion. and Dr. Simmons a g r e e d that w i t h the data u n d e r l y i n g namely: incapacitated by or inferences consistent t h a t a u t o p s y f i n d i n g c o u l d be drawn, (2) t h a t , a l t h o u g h F l u e l l e n may a cardiac f a t a l b e f o r e the f i r e , impact Gardner's two B o t h Dr. G a r d n e r (1) t h a t F l u e l l e n h a d s u f f e r e d a f a t a l c a r d i a c before the f i r e the only F l u e l l e n had and died he was still very quickly autopsy report the f i r s t i n f e r e n c e . event was that was not have b e e n immediately a l i v e and b r e a t h i n g in a "flash event fire." after Dr. p r e m i s e d upon h e r h a v i n g drawn As i n d i c a t e d by t h e f o l l o w i n g t e s t i m o n y , Dr. Simmons's amended a u t o p s y r e p o r t was 33 p r e m i s e d on h i s and 2100939 his colleagues' having drawn t h e second inference. Dr. Simmons s t a t e d : " [ T ] h e r e a r e s i t u a t i o n s t h a t a r e documented i n t h e literature that suggest people can d i e from c o n f l a g r a t i o n o r sudden f i r e e s s e n t i a l l y , u s u a l l y r e l a t i v e t o some s o r t o f f u e l s o u r c e a n d s u f f e r severe thermal injuries as w e l l as possible inhalational injuries that essentially k i l l them b e f o r e t h e y ' r e a b l e t o b r e a t h e i n l o n g enough t o a c c u m u l a t e s o o t o r c a r b o n m o n o x i d e . A n d b a s e d on d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h t h e s e n i o r p a t h o l o g i s t s , we f e l t l i k e t h i s was t h e most l i k e l y s c e n a r i o (Emphasis added.) quoted facts The f o r e g o i n g t e s t i m o n y , i n s o f a r as i t i s a b o v e , was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e a u t o p s y of the case. that and t h e N o t a b l y , h o w e v e r , D r . Simmons a d d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g a f t e r the e l l i p s i s i n d i c a t e d : accounts data [Fluellen] h a d been "given the eyewitness apparently moving r e s p o n s i v e a l t h o u g h somewhat c o n f u s e d a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l but before added.) t h e t r u c k was e n g u l f e d wreck (Emphasis T h a t p o r t i o n o f D r . Simmons's t e s t i m o n y f o u n d the e l l i p s i s the i n flames." and after was n o t c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e u n d i s p u t e d f a c t s o f case. After Fluellen's tractor-trailer h e a r d a n d " f e l t " an e x p l o s i o n . struck the tree, Wade i m m e d i a t e l y p u l l e d Wade over, p a r k e d h i s v e h i c l e , c r o s s e d t h e h i g h w a y , a n d saw t h a t t h e c a b of t h e t r u c k was " c o m p l e t e l y e n g u l f e d i n f l a m e s . " 34 Wade was 2100939 the first said person t o see F l u e l l e n t h a t F l u e l l e n was, a t t h a t t i m e , flames." There was no e v i d e n c e e i t h e r Wade o r an u n i d e n t i f i e d " a f t e r t h e wreck b u t b e f o r e as D r . Simmons Dr. -- after the crash, "completely indicating that Fluellen i n flames," testified. Fluellen was s t i l l alive and b r e a t h i n g i n t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k b e f o r e t h e cab s p l i t a p a r t and F l u e l l e n , s t i l l s e a t , was e j e c t e d f r o m t h e c a b . occurred, apart strapped i n t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k was a n e c e s s a r y condition f o r drawing t h e second i n f e r e n c e because t h e expert t h i s c a s e d e f i n e d a f l a s h f i r e a s one t h a t o c c u r s a small enclosed d i d not disagree) fire space. Dr. Gardner s t a t e d that a flash f i r e t h a t happens v e r y testimony i n suddenly i n (and D r . Simmons i s "an e x p l o s i o n , a very suddenly i n a s m a l l space." Wade (and, p r e s u m a b l y , t h e u n i d e n t i f i e d Fluellen, in his The b e l i e f t h a t , i f a f l a s h i t must have o c c u r r e d t h e cab s p l i t after the i n a f l a s h f i r e -- u n l e s s he a l s o believed that the f l a s h f i r e occurred hot anyone Simmons h a d no b a s i s f o r d r a w i n g t h e s e c o n d i n f e r e n c e that before covered i n b y s t a n d e r -- h a d s e e n t h e t r u c k was e n g u l f e d impact and d i e d v e r y q u i c k l y fire a n d Wade he was " c o v e r e d i n f l a m e s , " 35 When b y s t a n d e r s ) f i r s t saw but that fire was n o t 2100939 b u r n i n g i n a s m a l l e n c l o s e d space; air after was l y i n g During Fluellen's i t was b u r n i n g i n t h e open s e a t h a d b e e n e j e c t e d f r o m t h e cab a n d on t h e g r o u n d among o t h e r p i e c e s o f t h e w r e c k a g e . q u e s t i o n i n g o f Dr. Gardner by Hornady's c o u n s e l , t h e following occurred: "Q. I b e l i e v e you d e s c r i b e d v e r y h o t , v e r y sudden f i r e . instantaneous death? "A. I t would cause v e r y r a p i d t h e f l a s h f i r e as a Would t h a t cause death. "Q. Okay. D i d y o u , f r o m r e a d i n g S e r g e a n t Wade's t e s t i m o n y t h a t he ... h e a r d an e x p l o s i o n , p u l l e d h i s c a r o f f t o t h e s i d e o f t h e r o a d , w a i t e d on t r a f f i c and c r o s s e d two l a n e s o f i n t e r s t a t e , r a n i n t o t h e m e d i a n , r a n down t o Mr. F l u e l l e n who was -- t h e s e a t was on f i r e , I b e l i e v e d he t e s t i f i e d t h e c l o t h e s were on f i r e , t h e r e [were] f l a m e s ... on t h e g r a s s , in the cab, everything's on f i r e , y e t [Wade] b e l i e v e d [ F l u e l l e n ] was s t i l l a l i v e b e c a u s e o f t h e movement. Is that a flash fire -- i s t h a t d e s c r i p t i o n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a f l a s h f i r e t o you? "A. No, i t ' s n o t . I w o u l d e x p e c t - I mean, e v e n i f i t was a f l a s h f i r e , b y t h e t i m e a l l t h o s e o t h e r e v e n t s h a p p e n e d , [ F l u e l l e n ] w o u l d a l r e a d y be d e a d , and t h e movements would be those postmortem movements t h a t were due t o t h e h e a t . " T h e r e i s no e s c a p i n g t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t Dr. Simmons a n d his be colleagues simply misunderstood t h e f a c t s o f t h e case t o t h a t t h e r e were w i t n e s s e s who h a d s e e n F l u e l l e n a f t e r t h e 36 2100939 impact and apparently before the the v o l u n t a r y reported record mistaken misunderstanding view "movement" by on leaves of the a dead body. no doubt facts amended a u t o p s y r e p o r t and i t was induced documenting a f t e r the i n i t i a l rather Dr. [ F l u e l l e n ] m o v i n g and impact but before seen than him to Simmons's issue an amended d e a t h c e r t i f i c a t e . Simmons c o n c e d e d t h a t , " [ w ] i t h o u t t h a t EMS that's F l u e l l e n had 4 that that was to conclude movements o f a l i v i n g human b e i n g , e f f e c t s of f i r e The That 3 what l e d Dr. Simmons and h i s c o l l e a g u e s t h a t w i t n e s s e s who the fire. the report an Dr. specifically appearing confused flames, I would agree E v e n t h e p e r c u r i a m o p i n i o n a c k n o w l e d g e s Dr. Simmons's m i s t a k e n view of the f a c t s . It states: "Dr. Simmons's s t a t e m e n t t h a t t h e r e were w i t n e s s e s who saw F l u e l l e n a f t e r t h e impact but before the flames i s i n c o n s i s t e n t with the w i t n e s s e s ' s t a t e m e n t s t h a t F l u e l l e n and t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k were i m m e d i a t e l y e n g u l f e d i n f l a m e s . " So. 3d a t n.2. 3 4 Dr. Gardner e x p l a i n e d the phenomenon: "You e x p e c t a body t h a t ' s i n a f i r e t o be m o v i n g because of the c o n t r a c t u r e of the muscles. It's a w e l l - r e c o g n i z e d e f f e c t of t h e r m a l i n j u r y t o a body, alive or d e a d -w e l l , dead, that they will contract. And t h e d e s c r i p t i o n t h a t [Wade] g i v e s i n his deposition, t o me, he was describing this thermal injury that we call the 'pugilistic posture.'" 37 2100939 that [the cause of death] atherosclerotic cardiovascular could certificate's misunderstanding court being of the f a c t s . c o u l d have d i s r e g a r d e d w h i c h Dr. Simmons's attributed the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the based upon I t implies the f a l s e a curiam fundamental that the trial f a c t u a l premise upon c a u s e - o f - d e a t h o p i n i o n was b a s e d and s t i l l have d e t e r m i n e d t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d f r o m t h e r m a l per to disease." The p e r c u r i a m o p i n i o n d i s c o u n t s amended d e a t h be opinion suggests that the t r i a l injuries. court The may have determined that F l u e l l e n died i n a f l a s h f i r e that occurred i n the cab o f t h e t r u c k first explosion. That the a t the time of the i n i t i a l impact and 5 trial court may have settled upon such an explanation f o r F l u e l l e n ' s death i s c e r t a i n l y p o s s i b l e , but i f the trial court d i d so, i t s d e t e r m i n a t i o n s u r m i s e r a t h e r t h a n by e v i d e n c e . case d e f i n e d a flash fire as one was supported The e x p e r t t e s t i m o n y that occurs by i n this suddenly in a The p e r c u r i a m o p i n i o n s t a t e s t h a t , " b e c a u s e Wade's t e s t i m o n y was t h a t t h e cab was i m m e d i a t e l y e n g u l f e d i n f l a m e s , even b e f o r e the second e x p l o s i o n , the evidence tends t o support the conclusion that F l u e l l e n d i e d of thermal i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g f r o m a f l a s h f i r e e v e n more s t r o n g l y t h a n i f Dr. Simmons's m i s s t a t e m e n t h a d been c o r r e c t . " So. 3d a t n.2. 5 38 2100939 small enclosed explosion the tree space. Wade's t e s t i m o n y raises no e v i d e n c e indeed, there immediately a f t e r the t r a c t o r - t r a i l e r the p o s s i b i l i t y precipitated a flash fire was that crashed the explosion that the f i r e that may have occurred G i v e n t h a t t h e c a b was s p l i t a s e c o n d e x p l o s i o n , i t may have b e e n i m p o s s i b l e had e x i s t e d i n the cab. was, a p a r t by t o determine, even a t t h e scene o f t h e wreck, whether c o n d i t i o n s to a f l a s h f i r e into i n t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k , b u t t h e r e indicating a flash fire. that was an conducive 6 I n o r d e r t o r e c o v e r w o r k e r s ' c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s f o r an accidental medical Ala. v. injury, causation a claimant has by a preponderance of proving of the evidence. Code 1975, § 2 5 - 5 - 8 1 ( c ) ; W a t e r s B r o s . See Contractors, Inc. W i m b e r l e y , 20 So. 3d 125, 134 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 9 ) . succeed i n proving that the medical was the burden thermal cause o f F l u e l l e n ' s To death i n j u r y due t o a f l a s h f i r e i n t h e t r u c k ' s c a b , t h e d e p e n d e n t s were required t o show t h a t the p r o b a b i l i t y of a F o r i n s t a n c e , one s e e k i n g t o a s c e r t a i n w h e t h e r a f l a s h f i r e had o c c u r r e d might need t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h e cab windows h a d b e e n open o r c l o s e d a t t h e t i m e o f t h e f i r s t e x p l o s i o n ; t h e s e c o n d e x p l o s i o n t h a t s p l i t t h e cab a p a r t p r o b a b l y made s u c h a d e t e r m i n a t i o n impossible. 6 39 2100939 flash f i r e ' s h a v i n g o c c u r r e d i n t h e cab o f t h e t r u c k b e f o r e i t was s p l i t a p a r t b y t h e s e c o n d probability of Fluellen's e x p l o s i o n was g r e a t e r t h a n t h e having suffered a event before the e x p l o s i o n or the f i r e . show. 761 fatal cardiac This they f a i l e d t o See Ex p a r t e M o b i l e Power & L i g h t Co., 810 So. 2d 756, ( A l a . 2001) causation (determining o f home fire " p r e s e n t e d no e v i d e n c e was that plaintiffs' theory s p e c u l a t i v e because i n d i c a t i n g that the f i r s t of plaintiffs possibility was any more p r o b a b l e t h a n t h e o t h e r t w o " ) . A c c o r d B i s h o p v. Bombardier, (M.D. (affirming I n c . , 399 a summary product-liability establish source prove which of a fuel causation) . F. Supp. judgment action 2d 1372 i n favor because Ga. 2005) of defendant in a plaintiff, o f two p o s s i b i l i t i e s was who d i d not t h e more likely leak i n h i s personal watercraft, f a i l e d to I n M o b i l e Power & L i g h t , o u r supreme c o u r t stated: "'Many y e a r s ago, t h i s C o u r t gave an e x c e l l e n t e x p l a n a t i o n of the problem c a u s e d when a p a r t y presents s p e c u l a t i v e testimony t o prove c a u s a t i o n : "'"'Proof which goes no f u r t h e r t h a n t o show an i n j u r y c o u l d have o c c u r r e d i n an a l l e g e d way, does not warrant the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i t d i d so o c c u r , where f r o m t h e same p r o o f t h e 40 2100939 i n j u r y can w i t h e q u a l p r o b a b i l i t y be attributed to some other cause.' [ S o u t h w o r t h v. Shea, 131 Ala. 419, 421, 30 So. 774, 775 (1901).] " ' " B u t a n i c e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n must be exercised i n the application of this p r i n c i p l e . As a t h e o r y o f c a u s a t i o n , a conjecture is simply an explanation c o n s i s t e n t w i t h known f a c t s o r c o n d i t i o n s b u t n o t d e d u c i b l e f r o m them as a r e a s o n a b l e inference. There may be two or more p l a u s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n s as t o how an e v e n t h a p p e n e d o r what p r o d u c e d i t ; y e t , i f t h e evidence i s without s e l e c t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n t o any one o f them, t h e y r e m a i n c o n j e c t u r e s o n l y . On t h e o t h e r hand, i f t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e w h i c h p o i n t s t o any one t h e o r y o f c a u s a t i o n , i n d i c a t i n g a l o g i c a l sequence of c a u s e and e f f e c t , t h e n t h e r e i s a j u r i d i c a l basis for such a determination, notwithstanding the e x i s t e n c e of other p l a u s i b l e t h e o r i e s w i t h or w i t h o u t support i n the evidence 810 So. 2d a t 760 1250, 1254 Dickson, (Ala. 211 ( q u o t i n g Ex p a r t e D i v e r s e y C o r p . , 742 1999), A l a . 481, quoting 486, 100 in So. 665, Because the dependents p r e s e n t e d that c o n d i t i o n s conducive turn no to a f l a s h f i r e of the t r u c k at the time of the i n i t i a l 669 even rise to the level of 41 a Ry. 2d v. (1924)). evidence indicating e x i s t e d i n the impact the theory t h a t F l u e l l e n d i e d i n a f l a s h f i r e not Southern So. cab and e x p l o s i o n , i n t h e cab conjecture. That does is so 2100939 because there was no e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e f l a s h - f i r e t h e o r y was " c o n s i s t e n t w i t h known f a c t s o r c o n d i t i o n s " i n t h e cab. if Id. A f o r t i o r i , such Fluellen than a flash died fire had of thermal cardiac the theory event conditions" conditions] was and that both occurred, injuries the p r o b a b i l i t y that contrast, he d i e d from t h e cause with [those as a r e a s o n a b l e i n f e r e n c e . " court's was that greater event. In caused by a known facts or known facts or Id. c a s e c o n v i n c e s me t h a t t h e d e p e n d e n t s medical causation Accordingly, j u d g m e n t i s due t o be r e v e r s e d remanded judgment i n f a v o r fire of a cardiac "consistent a preponderance of the evidence. and i n that not s a t i s f y t h e i r burden of p r o v i n g trial the p r o b a b i l i t y F l u e l l e n ' s d e a t h was "deducible My r e v i e w o f t h i s did t h e r e was no e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t , f o r the r e n d i t i o n o f Hornady. 42 by I b e l i e v e the in i t s entirety and entry of a

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.