Gleaves v. Dillehay

Case Background

Howard Gleaves filed a personal injury lawsuit against Terry Dillehay alleging auto negligence after he sustained a significant full-thickness rotator cuff tear in a moderate right-of-way motor vehicle accident. The case was filed in the presided over this case. [Case number: 23-81]

Cause

At 67 years old, Howard Gleaves drove along Gallatin Pike in Madison. Meanwhile, Terry Dillehay, a local insurance agent, attempted to exit a bank parking lot onto the same road. As Dillehay began pulling out, he noticed approaching traffic and immediately hit the brakes in his Toyota sedan. However, instead of halting as expected, the vehicle allegedly “surged” forward into oncoming traffic.

Moments later, Dillehay’s car collided with Gleaves’ sedan in a broadside impact.

Injury

Emergency responders transported Howard Gleaves to the ER, where medical staff treated him for apparent whiplash and soft-tissue injuries. Following his initial treatment, Gleaves reported ongoing shoulder pain, prompting further medical evaluation.

He later sought care from Dr. Sean Kaminsky, an orthopedic specialist based in Hermitage, who diagnosed a complex shoulder injury. The injury included a full-thickness rotator cuff tear and damage to the biceps tendon. To address these issues, Dr. Kaminsky performed an arthroscopic surgical repair, which involved inserting multiple screws to stabilize the shoulder.

Damages

In this lawsuit, Howard Gleaves pursued damages from Terry Dillehay. He sought compensation for his medical expenses and noneconomic damages if he succeeded at trial.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Howard Gleaves
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Dale Krout | Susan Neal Wiley | Kristi Dowden | Kelli Lester
    • Defendant(s):  Terry Dillehay
  • Counsel for Defendant(s): Thomas W. Shumate, IV | Tanner C. Gibson,

Claims

In this auto negligence lawsuit, Howard Gleaves sought damages from Terry Dillehay, arguing that Dillehay caused the collision by pulling into his path. The Plaintiff supported his claim with evidence from Dr. Sean Kaminsky, who linked Gleaves’ painful shoulder injury to the accident.

Although Gleaves had pre-existing “wear and tear” in his shoulder from a 2015 crash and years of unloading packages at T.J. Maxx, Kaminsky identified a new, traumatic, and painful injury. This medical opinion strengthened Gleaves’ case by connecting the injury directly to the collision.

Defense

Terry Dillehay’s defense strategy involved several key arguments. First, he focused on the circumstances of the crash itself. He attempted to assign fault to Toyota Manufacturing or a local Toyota dealer, alleging they failed to properly repair the vehicle’s brakes. Additionally, Dillehay argued that a sudden emergency caused the collision, claiming the brakes unexpectedly failed.

Howard Gleaves challenged these defenses, emphasizing that no expert evidence supported the brake failure theory. Ultimately, then-presiding Judge Binkley granted summary judgment in favor of Gleaves on the issue of Toyota’s comparative fault. However, the court allowed Dillehay to proceed with the sudden emergency defense. The case was later assigned for trial before Judge Briley.

Expert Testimony

Terry Dillehay also challenged the damages using a records-review IME prepared by Dr. David West, an orthopedic specialist in Nashville. West, who was compensated $4,500 for his evaluation, concluded that the rotator cuff injury resulted from wear and tear. He pointed to the 2015 incident and Gleaves’ work history unloading packages as contributing factors.

West argued that Gleaves had only sustained a soft-tissue injury in the collision. He also noted that Gleaves received a pain injection in his shoulder just eight days before the crash. This opinion contrasted sharply with the Plaintiff’s testimony, where Gleaves claimed he had suffered a new and significant injury from the accident.

Jury Verdict

On November 7, 2024, the jury ruled in favor of Howard Gleaves and quickly proceeded to determine damages, as there was no issue of comparative fault.

They awarded Gleaves $169,045 to cover his medical expenses. Additionally, the jury granted $245,000 in noneconomic damages across five categories:

  • Past suffering: $50,000
  • Past loss of enjoyment of life: $25,000
  • Future suffering: $30,000
  • Future loss of enjoyment of life: $40,000
  • Permanent injury: $100,000

In total, the jury awarded Gleaves $414,045. The court entered a consistent judgment reflecting this verdict in this auto negligence lawsuit.

Court Documents:

Available upon request