## Facts

- Seventeen-year-old Anne Hockema struck eight-year-old Jacob Secrest on a road in White County, Indiana, after Jacob ran into the roadway and collided with her vehicle.
- Jacob suffered a broken right elbow and collarbone, underwent surgery, and attended physical therapy.
- Jacob’s sister, Erica, witnessed the collision; Jacob’s mother assisted and accompanied him to the hospital; Jacob’s father was not present.
- Jacob, Erica, and their parents sued Anne for negligence and sued Anne’s father, Stanley, under Indiana’s minor-driver financial responsibility statute.
- The parties stipulated Jacob’s medical expenses totaled $38,708.44.
- The jury was instructed that Jacob could not recover if his fault exceeded 50%, but that the parents’ and sister’s claims should be reduced by Anne’s percentage of fault if Anne was at fault at all.
- The jury found Jacob 66.75% at fault and Anne 33.25% at fault, and awarded $0 damages to all plaintiffs.
- On a post-trial motion, the trial court granted additur and entered judgment for $12,780.56 (33.25% of the stipulated medical expenses).

## Issues

1. Whether, under Indiana’s modified comparative-fault statute, parents may recover a minor child’s medical expenses when the child is more than 50% at fault and thus barred from recovery.
2. Whether the trial court erred by granting additur awarding a percentage of stipulated medical expenses after a jury returned a zero-damages verdict.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the additur judgment and remanded with instructions to reinstate the jury’s $0 verdict.
- Because Jacob’s fault exceeded 50%, he was statutorily barred from recovery.
- The parents’ medical-expense claim was derivative of Jacob’s claim and therefore barred by the same comparative-fault allocation.
- With no legally recoverable claim, the trial court lacked a basis to award damages via additur.

## Legal Principles

- Under Indiana’s modified comparative-fault scheme, a claimant whose fault exceeds 50% may not recover damages.
- A parent’s claim to recover an injured minor’s medical expenses is derivative of the child’s underlying tort claim and is subject to the same comparative-fault bar that applies to the child.
- A court may not use additur to award damages that are unavailable as a matter of law under the comparative-fault statute.

## Conclusion

The appellate court held that when an injured child is more than 50% at fault, Indiana law bars both the child’s recovery and the parents’ derivative claim for the child’s medical expenses; accordingly, the trial court’s additur award was reversed and the jury’s zero-damages verdict reinstated.


Hockema v. J.S., 832 N.E.2d 537 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005)