- Gentlemen, start your drones: Judge’s ruling opens door for commercial use
- Soldier who hid, bragged about not saluting flag to be punished — in secret
- ‘Maverick’ of the seas: ‘Top Gun’ school for U.S. ship officers to launch
- Putin declares Sochi Paralympics open amid Ukrainian protest
- ‘In Jesus name, we pray’ sparks ire at Ohio council meeting
- Navy’s first laser weapon ready for prime time; drone killer to deploy this summer
- Billionaire backer: Rick Santorum ‘needs to be heard’ in 2016
- Obamacare fallout: 49 percent pessimistic; 45 percent ‘scared’
- DHS accused of holding U.S. citizen at airport, using emails to pry into her sex life
- Seattle socialist: Minimum-wage discussion skewed by ‘right-wing’ GAO analysis
Court upholds woman’s medical emergency defense
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - A Cedar Falls woman cannot be held responsible for an accident that occurred in 2008 because a stroke she suffered while driving impaired her vision, the Iowa Supreme Court said Friday.
It was the court’s first time considering the medical emergency defense in an accident that impaired a driver who at the time wasn’t aware she was suffering a medical problem.
Her doctor concluded she had suffered a stroke while driving which made it impossible for her to see the truck. Hagenow’s expert witness claimed the stroke came after the accident.
A jury found her not at fault for medical reasons at a trial in May 2012. Hagenow appealed, arguing the district court judge erred in the instructions to the jury on the sudden emergency defense. He also claimed evidence was insufficient to show Schmidt suffered a stroke prior to the accident and that the medical event caused the accident.
The Iowa Court of Appeals found in April that the jury instruction on the sudden emergency defense did not apply to the circumstances of this accident and was not supported by the evidence. The court reversed the jury verdict and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court in the ruling filed Friday disagreed and restored the jury’s verdict finding evidence was sufficient to allow the emergency defense and any issues with the wording of the jury instructions were harmless.
“Based on this evidence, a reasonable juror could find that Schmidt rear-ended the Hagenows’ vehicle because of her stroke and loss of vision. We conclude the evidence was sufficient to submit the defense,” the court wrote.
Follow David Pitt on Twitter at https://twitter.com/davepitt
TWT Video Picks
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
- CPAC 2014: Rand Paul urges conservatives to fight for liberty
- Putin has transformed Russian army into a lean, mean fighting machine
- Kim Jong-un calls for execution of 33 Christians
- EDITORIAL: Connecticut revolts against gun controls that could criminalize 300,000
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Aronofsky's 'Noah' banned in Qatar, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates
- Russia should be booted from FIFA World Cup, senators say
- PIPES: Islam's inadvertent adverse effects on adherents
- MILLER: Donald Trump says hes a Tea Party member
- Soldier who hid to avoid saluting the flag to be punished in secret; Army won't release details
Pope Francis meets his 'mini-me'
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Winter storm hits states — again