Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Court Run Amok

What happens when the highest Court in this State (the Oklahoma Supreme Court) takes collective leave of its senses?

You get a decision like Covel v. Rodriguez.

You probably don't recognize those names, and that's understandable. But let me help a little. This case is about the sad and unfortunate accident involving the death of Toby Keith's father while driving on I-35. H.K. Covel, Toby Keith's father, was driving northbound on the inside lane of I-35, when he lost control of his pickup truck, crossed the median, and entered the southbound lanes into oncoming traffic. Mr. Covel hit a bus, the collision almost being head on, and was killed instantly. Thereafter, the family filed a lawsuit in McClain County for wrongful death against the bus company and insurance company, who insured the bus.

I'll spare you the legal details, basically Mr. Covel's family said that the bus' brakes were defective and that is what caused their father's death.

I had to scratch my head at this, because Mr. Covel had lost control of his pickup truck, crossed the median, entered into oncoming traffic, and hit the bus head on. The facts also showed that the bus was obeying all traffic laws.

A McClain County jury found for Toby Keith and the family, and awarded $2.8 million in damages, and $5,000.00 dollars in punitive damages against the bus company. If there was ever a case of getting "home-towned" this is it.

A McClain County District Judge denied all attempts to overturn the verdict, and the bus company appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals, Division 4, correctly reversed the verdict, and entered judgment for the bus company. The facts of this case show that the bus and driver did nothing wrong.

The case should have been over at this point.

But alas, here comes the Oklahoma Supreme Court riding to the rescue. Not only did it accept the case, which is called certiorari, but it published an opinion overruling the Court of Civil Appeals, and upholding the jury's verdict against the bus company.

All you got to do is change the Plaintiff's in this case to ones less notable, and this lawsuit could have easily been sanctioned for being frivolous.

The Supreme Court's opinion states that competent evidence exists to support the jury verdict, and that the verdict was not the product of passion or prejudice. Really? Just what was it then? There is no evidence to show the bus or driver was negligent at all. Mr. Covel lost control, crossed the median into oncoming traffic and hit the bus, not the other way around.

I like country music; I even like some of Mr. Keith's songs, and I believe that it's good for Oklahomans to have role models like Toby Keith. The death of his father was a deeply tragic accident. But that is what it was. . . an accident. And for the Oklahoma Supreme Court to run afoul of law and logic can support but one conclusion for this opinion. At the start of this statement, I included all of the Supreme Court Justices taking leave of their senses. I was mistaken. There was one, that was not swayed, nor deluded, nor starry eyed, and was willing to commit to common sense and the facts of the case. Justice Steven Taylor writes a dissenting opinion which sums up the entire fallacy of this decision.

"Mr. Covel was northbound on I-35. He crossed the median and went into the southbound outside lane and collided head-on with the bus. It is undisputed that the bus was obeying all traffic laws and had brakes that met all federal standards. The brakes on the bus had absolutely nothing to do with this collision. Mr. Covel uncontrollably careened in front of the bus and crashed into the bus. This was a sudden, instantaneous and unavoidable event. No matter what kind of brakes the bus may have had, there is nothing the bus driver can do about a flying car instantly appearing from the other side of the highway. It is fundamentally unfair for the bus insurance company to be required to pay over $2.8 million because Mr. Covel lost control of his vehicle. The Court of Civil Appeals properly found that the plaintiff's expert opinions were not based on scientific foundation and that the opinion on causation was a bare assertion and totally insufficient to support this huge verdict."

Just looking out for you.