## Facts

- On October 1, 1999, Octavia Riley was driving in New Orleans when Coleen Salley ran a stop sign and collided with Riley’s vehicle.
- Riley had a preexisting neck condition and had received physical therapy for it before the crash.
- After the collision, Riley reported increased cervical pain and weakness in her right arm.
- Riley sought medical care, and her physician ordered diagnostic testing, including a myelogram.
- The testing indicated spinal cord compression on the right side of Riley’s cervical spine, associated with a herniated disc (described in the record as at C4–5).
- Riley underwent cervical surgery to address the herniated disc and related compression.
- Riley sued Salley and Salley’s insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (and related State Farm coverage), seeking damages for personal injury.
- Before trial, the parties stipulated that Salley was liable for causing the automobile collision, leaving causation of Riley’s claimed injuries and the amount of damages as the disputed issues.
- After a bench trial, the trial court rendered judgment for Riley and against Salley and State Farm in the amount of $137,652.60.
- Salley and State Farm appealed, contesting medical causation and challenging the damages award.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court was clearly wrong/manifestly erroneous in finding that the October 1, 1999 collision more likely than not caused Riley’s cervical injury or worsened her preexisting condition to the point that surgery was necessary.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding $137,652.60 in damages.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
- The court held the evidence—especially the medical testimony—supported a finding that it was more probable than not that the crash caused Riley’s injury or worsened her prior neck condition such that surgery was required.
- Applying manifest error review, the court declined to second-guess the trial court’s evaluation of the competing medical proof and its factual findings on causation.
- The court also upheld the damages award, finding no abuse of discretion in the $137,652.60 judgment given the injury and surgical treatment.

## Legal Principles

- A personal-injury plaintiff must prove medical causation by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the accident more likely than not caused the complained-of injury or worsened a prior condition.
- Causation findings in tort cases are factual determinations reviewed on appeal under the manifest error/clearly wrong standard.
- A defendant is responsible for the natural and probable consequences of tortious conduct, even when the plaintiff had a preexisting infirmity; the defendant “takes the victim as found” and is liable for accident-related aggravation of the prior condition.
- Damage awards are reviewed under an abuse-of-discretion standard; an appellate court does not revise quantum unless the award exceeds the trial court’s broad discretion.

## Conclusion

Riley v. Salley affirmed a bench-trial judgment for an injured motorist after a stop-sign collision, holding that the trial court did not clearly err in finding the crash more likely than not caused or worsened Riley’s cervical condition leading to surgery, and that the resulting $137,652.60 damages award was within the trial court’s discretion.


Riley v. Salley, 874 So.2d 874 (2004)