Section 13.29 Automobile Collision

• Library: Sources of Proof (2014 Ed.)

D. (§13.29) Automobile Collision

Numerous Missouri cases have held that an expert may not testify as to the point of impact in a vehicular collision. In Housman v. Fiddyment, 421 S.W.2d 284 (Mo. banc 1967), the jury was provided with testimony from both drivers as to:

• the point of impact;

• photographs of the terrain;

• damage to the cars; and

• skid marks on the road.

In addition, one party sought to introduce expert testimony as to which car was in the wrong lane. The Court declined to admit this testimony, holding that it invaded the province of the jury. The Court noted that modern jurors are familiar with cars and are sufficiently qualified to determine the point of impact based on evidence of the witnesses. Id. at 289–90; see also:

· Kunce v. Breen, 671 S.W.2d 23 (Mo. App. S.D. 1984) (expert testimony is not admissible to establish the point of impact)

· Zempel v. Slater, 182 S.W.3d 609, 618 (Mo. App. E.D. 2005)

· Carroll v. Kelsey, 234 S.W.3d 559, 565 (Mo. App. W.D. 2007)

Point-of-impact testimony is proper from a lay witness when it is based on “perceptible facts which tend to show where an accident occurred.” Elmahdi v. Ethridge, 987 S.W.2d 366, 372 (Mo. App. W.D. 1999).

An accident reconstruction expert may not testify as to a vehicle’s speed at impact based on...