This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was driving when he saw headlights of a westbound vehicle cross the centerline. P slowed down, but the car, driven by D spun out of control and slid sideways into the front of P's vehicle. Both were injured in the accident. D lost control of his vehicle when he hit an icy patch of snow on the road. P sued D for negligence. The investigating police officer testified that an ice patch regularly forms during the winter in the portion of the westbound lane in which D was driving. D acknowledged that he had previously experienced the ice patch in that area and 'was aware of the possibility' that the ice might be present the morning of the accident. There was conflicting evidence on whether D was intoxicated, speeding, or both. On D's request over P's objection, the trial court instructed the jury on the sudden emergency doctrine. D got the verdict. It held that D was not negligent and therefore did not cause P's injuries, damages, or losses. The trial court awarded $34,616.73 in costs to D. P appealed and the appeals court affirmed. It held that the trial court properly instructed on the sudden emergency doctrine. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.