KENNETH J. OWENS Appellant
FORD MOTOR COMPANY OHIO TRUCK PLANT DIVISION, et al. Appellee
FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
LORAIN, OHIO CASE No. 17CV193290.
JENNIFER L. LAWTHER, DANIEL A. KIRSCHNER, and COREY J. KUZMA,
Attorneys at Law, for Appellant. SUSAN A. BERES, Assistant
Attorney General, for Appellee.
R. HENRICKSON and SHANA A. SAMSON, Attorneys at Law, for
TIMOTHY J. KRANTZ, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
S. CALLAHAN JUDGE.
Appellant, Kenneth Owens, appeals an order of the Lorain
County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.
Mr. Owens alleged that he was injured during his employment
with Ford Motor Company ("Ford"). When a portion of
his claim was disallowed, Mr. Owens appealed the decision to
the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas and filed a complaint
asserting his right to participate in the workers'
compensation system. In anticipation of trial, Mr. Owens
filed the video deposition of his expert witness, Dr. Joseph
Totaro. On September 19, 2018, Ford filed an objection log
related to Dr. Totaro's deposition, maintaining, in part,
that "Dr. Totaro is a Chiropractor, [c]annot opine to
reasonable medical certainty - Not an MD."
(Emphasis in original.) Although the record reflects several
motions in limine filed by Mr. Owens, it appears that Ford
did not file any such written motion with respect to Dr.
Totaro's deposition in advance of trial.
The case proceeded to a bench trial on September 20, 2018. On
the same date, the trial court journalized an order that
granted Ford's motion for a directed verdict and entered
judgment in favor of Ford, concluding that Mr. Owens was not
entitled to participate in the workers' compensation
system for four conditions enumerated in the order. Mr. Owens
filed this appeal.
TRIAL COURT ERRED IN GRANTING APPELLEE'S MOTION FOR
DIRECTED VERDICT FOLLOWING AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION IN FAILING
TO ADMIT A PORTION OF THE TRIAL TESTIMONY AND CAUSAL OPINION
AS TO THE DISALLOWED CONDITIONS OF APPELLANT'S EXPERT
Mr. Owens' sole assignment of error argues that the trial
court erred in granting a directed verdict in favor of Ford.
Specifically, Mr. Owens maintains that the trial court abused
its discretion by excluding evidence from Dr. Totaro's
deposition and that the absence of that evidence led the
trial court to, in turn, improperly grant a directed verdict.
This Court cannot review the merits of Mr. Owens'
assignment of error, however, because the trial transcript is
not part of the record on appeal. When Mr. Owens filed his
notice of appeal, he also ...