## Facts

- Geneva Morsette drove a pickup truck with two passengers: Gordon Starr and Alfred Morsette.
- The truck was involved in a one-vehicle rollover crash; the cause of the crash was disputed.
- Starr sued Geneva for personal injuries arising from the crash; Alfred was also named as a defendant.
- Linda Perhus, the first person to arrive at the scene, testified that Geneva stated she had been driving and that Alfred grabbed the steering wheel, causing the accident.
- Sheriff Dardis testified that when he asked who had been driving, Geneva indicated Alfred and stated words to the effect that he “jerked the wheel away from” her.
- At trial, the defendants objected that these accident-scene statements were inadmissible hearsay.
- A jury returned a verdict for Starr against both Geneva and Alfred, and judgment was entered on that verdict.
- Defendants moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or, alternatively, a new trial; the trial court denied the motion.
- On appeal, defendants provided only a partial transcript and a limited appendix.

## Issues

1. Whether Geneva’s accident-scene statements to a bystander and to the sheriff were inadmissible hearsay, or admissible as spontaneous statements made during or immediately after the घटना (often treated as res gestae/excited utterance).
2. Whether the defendants could obtain reversal based on claims of insufficient evidence of Geneva’s negligence when they failed to provide a complete appellate record of the evidence relevant to that finding.
3. Whether Geneva’s out-of-court statements could support liability against co-defendant Alfred, and whether the defendants showed entitlement to a directed verdict/JNOV/new trial as to him.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed the judgment for Starr and affirmed the order denying JNOV or a new trial.
- The court found no reversible error in admitting Geneva’s accident-scene statements; the statements were properly treated as spontaneous statements connected to the occurrence and could be received despite a hearsay objection.
- The court held that appellants challenging evidentiary sufficiency must provide a transcript of all evidence relevant to the challenged findings; because appellants submitted only a partial record, they did not meet their burden to show error.
- Given the limited record, the court would not overturn the jury’s verdict or the trial court’s denial of directed verdict/JNOV/new trial for either Geneva or Alfred.

## Legal Principles

- A party appealing on the ground that a finding is unsupported by the evidence must provide an appellate record that includes all evidence relevant to that finding; without it, the appellant has not shown error.
- When the appellate record is incomplete on a point raised by the appellant, the reviewing court will not assume missing portions favor the appellant; the verdict and judgment are presumed correct.
- Statements made at an accident scene by a participant, close in time to the event and under the stress of the occurrence, may be admitted as spontaneous statements associated with the event (commonly described as res gestae and consistent with the excited-utterance rationale).
- Denial of a directed verdict, JNOV, or a new trial will be affirmed where the appellant fails to show, on a complete record, that the evidence could not support the jury’s verdict.

## Conclusion

Starr v. Morsette upheld a jury verdict arising from a one-vehicle rollover because the trial court did not commit reversible error by admitting Geneva Morsette’s immediate accident-scene statements about how the crash occurred, and because the defendants—having supplied only a partial transcript—did not carry their burden to show that the evidence was insufficient or that they were entitled to directed verdict, JNOV, or a new trial.


Starr v. Morsette, 236 N.W.2d 183 (1975)