JUDGMENT
Nancy
Mills, Justice
PROCEDURE
In his
complaint filed July 17, 2017, plaintiff Stephen Carpenter
alleged defendant Glenn Miles was negligent and proximately
caused damages to plaintiff on July 30, 20!5 in Standish,
Maine. Plaintiff alleged that defendant was operating a motor
vehicle and collided with plaintiff, who was running on the
side of the road. Plaintiff also alleged that defendant's
intentional or reckless conduct was so outrageous that malice
may be implied. Plaintiff seeks damages for past and future
medical expenses; past and future pain and suffering,
emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life; past and
future lost wages, lost earning capacity; and punitive
damages.[1]
Defendant
was served on July 17, 2017. He filed no response to the
complaint and was defaulted on September 5, 2017. Jury-waived
trial on damages was held on December 7, 2017. Plaintiff
appeared with counsel; defendant did not appear.
FACTS
Prior
to the collision on July 30, 2015, plaintiff was an avid
runner and ran every other day. He participated in marathons
and triathlons. He described himself as a calm, happy guy,
even-tempered, and slow to anger. He was self-employed as a
carpenter, doing construction and renovation, a very physical
job.
On July
30, 2015, he was hit by defendant's truck. Defendant was
traveling 63 miles per hour in a 30 mile per hour zone on
Middle Jam Road, a curvy, bumpy, narrow country road.
Defendant ultimately hit a tree, and the impact crushed the
passenger's compartment and trapped defendant in the
truck. (Pl's Ex. 1.)
Plaintiff
sustained compound fractures of his fibula and tibia, injury
to his back, and a fractured pelvis. His kidneys were
bleeding and not functioning, which required dialysis. His
sacrum required screws and permanent wiring. Three rods were
inserted in his leg. The first and second rods resulted in
infection and were removed. Antibiotics and a PICC line were
used for weeks. Finally, a titanium rod was inserted, which
was removed in spring 2017. (Pl's Exs. 2-6.) He sustained
a traumatic brain injury, resulting in significant memory
loss. He underwent physical and cognitive therapy.
Plaintiff's convalescence and recovery were difficult.
In
spite of these very serious physical injuries, plaintiff
considers his emotional injuries to be the most significant,
long-lasting, and prominent consequence of the collision. He
finds his emotional distress difficult to explain. He
considered suicide as the wisest option at one time. He falls
under the PTSD rubric. He endures a violent and relentless
mental attack and anxiety and feels he is under the threat
that something wants him gone. He felt this as soon as he
regained consciousness after anesthesia; as he tried to
reduce reliance on narcotics, his anxiety increased. He
currently has a therapist to address this emotional impact
and although he has learned to deal with this impact, he
believes it is permanent. Plaintiff is 61 years old and has a
life expectancy of 82 years.
His
medical expenses total approximately $450, 000.00. He was
unable to work for slightly more than one year and his lost
wages for that time period total $30, 000.00.
As a
result of this accident, defendant was indicted for
aggravated assault and reckless conduct with a dangerous
weapon. (PL.'s Ex. 2.) After a plea of no contest, he was
sentenced on the reckless conduct charge to three years with
all but four months suspended and two years of probation. He
fled to Florida twice, once in violation of his probation
conditions, and was extradited. He was involved in another
car accident, which he caused. Defendant had no automobile
insurance in effect on July 30, 2015.
Plaintiff
tried to initiate this lawsuit prior to July 2017 but was
unable to serve defendant because he absconded. Defendant was
ultimately served with the complaint while incarcerated at
the Cumberland County Jail.
CONCLUSION
Because
defendant was defaulted, "the allegations in the
plaintiff's complaint are deemed to be true and become
findings of fact." McAlister v. Slosberg, 658
A.2d 658, 660 (Me. 1995). Based on those findings and the
evidence presented at trial, the court concludes defendant
was negligent in his operation of his motor vehicle and that
negligence proximately caused plaintiff's injuries and
damages. The court concludes further that defendant's
conduct was so outrageous that malice may be implied. ...