WPCr3 Wj}CF4㨥ݸFy_QBX.vE19D`g 8Fcy"fT<^%|ğ8&^/sK/@b|awu#Fs"VmZBVms P2~I' T KZD;_ҡ%6-a#ʼnaPLD5zΖ@*:IholҴ=ڞG#||81ժ_k0NQIx!cc%zqůג cJ+(> R%W^7e+5֪K Mgw~.fq7G( -$#U3 r"s2(}^+ʦW i0.*\&⓿;͹C.љfSq7G|yE;oĊbu(e|XQMӟg+"< y܆>RL.QMU:>6t 0j 0} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0! 0" 0# 0$ 0% 0<% 0<& 0%J& 03& 0( 0:(( 0*U>h+  +  +  +  + D++ A+@ ,o,@ 1-o;- (-  -  -  .  . V. Vt. . 1g. 7I/ B-W/ B// 0/#K0UN 2 %Z2M`2(d2N2^ 2 1u2 723wA34E3Y3 m[3\  `&Times New Roman'  LA satisfied Microsoft Office UserL0A satisfied Microsoft Office User .   2[+[ 0_level1   , 8.` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level2   X 8.` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level3    8.4` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level4    8.` ` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level5    8. ` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level6    8. ` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level7   4 8. ` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level8   ` 8.` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[+[ 0_level9    8.<` hp x (#823  ..   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl1   , 8.` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl2   X 8.` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl3    8.4` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl4    8.` ` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl5    8. ` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl6    8. ` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl7   4 8. ` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl8   ` 8.` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levsl9    8.<` hp x (#823  Ԁ   8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl1   , 8.` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl2   X 8.` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl3    8.4` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl4    8.` ` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl5    8. ` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl6    8. ` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl7   4 8. ` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl8   ` 8.` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  2[[ 0_levnl9    8.<` hp x (#823     8.` hp x (#8  6? 24Heading 1  XXX          <:Default Para<:Footnote Ref6// 4Body Text  XXX      8| 6Block Text  XXX  X   5+` ` hp x 5      8.` hp x (#80A .Footer  (#A7X` hp x (#A:8Page Number  &)..      AXAXA  _!  (#X!$  XX'XXXX#$  (# X$  #  $&  'X'X'(2$ ?k!..      AXAXA  \  `&Times New Romana1a3a4a6'dxd,&Draw Object <<=8C HKKKK/ WPC i K513%)+-51d~ -1 WPC i K513%)+-51d~ -a_Opinion_Summarya9a10a11a12a_Appellant_s_Attorney_Name___Appellant_a_Appellee_s_Attorney_Name___Appellee_s_QuickMark 35=CIOU[a1(1)a.i.1.a.i.1.a.: i.)Hairline d  d#|x(rk$..      AXAXAHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularAXau+s 3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Gi)y*rtyBardU ?k!..      AXAXA  _       %8dd8  0p x (#X0J Q 0J INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  Qgg$ATNASHVILLEJ 0Ԉ    H.` hp x (#X(#HӀMarch6,2001Session > XXJ J XX % ( %(JANICEF.ROBERTSv.STEVIED.DAVIS,ETAL. 0 ЀXXJ    <  % ) %)ԀADirectAppealfromthe% * CircuitCourt%*forDavidsonCounty.  H No.% + %+"96C1856TheHonorableWalterKurtz,Judge.  . -  XX -.k[W$~ Kp@0 dd`  KE K K2 -  XX No.M200001974_COA_ԄR3CVFiledAugust7,_2001_       -  XX -0k[W$~ Kp@0 dd`  KEk K Kk2 -  XX  !  XXXX    !\  % 2 OnMay17,1995,PlaintiffJaniceRobertsandherhusbandMax_Nichols_Ԁwereinvolvedinan `  automobileaccidentwiththeDefendantFoodLion,Inc.andtheirdriverStevieD.Davis.The F  accidentoccurredonInterstate24.PlaintiffRobertssuedtheDefendantsintheCircuitCourtof ,| DavidsonCountyseekingarecoveryof$270,000forinjuriesandvariousamountsofdamages b shesustainedasaresultoftheaccident.AbenchtrialwasheldonMay1,2000.OnMay4, H 2000thetrialcourtbyMemorandumandOrderfoundthatPlaintiffRobertswasentitledto . recover$25,000forreasonableandnecessarymedicalexpenses,painandsufferingandlossof  enjoymentoflife,andforsomediminutioninearningcapacity.OnJune2,2000Plaintiff  Robertsfiledamotionfornewtrial,whichwassubsequentlydeniedbythetrialcourtonJuly7,  2000.Thisappealfollowed.PlaintiffRobertsinsiststhatthetrialcourterredinnotgrantinga v motionforcontinuance;notallowingthedepositiontestimonyofawitness;initsawardof \ damages;andbynotallocatingmoniesforfuturemedicalexpenses.!\݌ B Ќ    XXXX      XXXX      &     %2% 3 %3?Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;Judgmentofthe% 4 %4ԀCircuitCourtAffirmed   Ԍ ^ Ќ    XXXX    '  DonR.Ash,Sp.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhich% 5 %5F&z%XXARMERXX%&z,J.,and% 6 %6-_HIGHERS_,J * joined.  % 7 %7Bill_Hodde_ԀandBruceKessler,Madison,Tennessee,fortheappellant,JaniceF.Roberts. !! JonathanColeand_Sandi_ԀL.Pack,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellees,StevieD.Davisand X## FoodLion,Inc. >$$   % 8 %8  OPINION   &Z!&     % 9 %9zԀI. '&#( XX!  XX    !    Inordertoputthistransactionintoperspective,somebackgroundinformationwillassist {)$* intheprocess.OnMay17,1995,appellantJaniceF.Roberts( Ms.Roberts)wasinvolvedin a*%+ anautomobileaccidentonInterstate24.Ms.Robertsautomobilewasstruckintherearbythe G+&, appelleeStevieD.Davis( Mr.Davis).Mr.DaviswasdrivingasemitractorownedbyFood -,}'- Lion.Bothpartiesweretravelinginthesamedirectionwhentheaccidentoccurred.Theimpact -c(. _ofthecollisioncausedMs.Robertsvehicletotravelseveralfeetbeforecomingtorestonthe  median.Ms.Robertswasabletoexitthecarunderherowncontrol,however,upontheurging  ofmedicalpersonnel,shewastransportedtoVanderbiltMedicalCenter( Vanderbilt).Ms. | Robertsspentseveralhoursatthehospitalwhereshewasexaminedandxrayed.Vanderbilt b notednoevidenceofseriousheadinjuriesandreleasedher.!%݌ H Ќ    XX  !  XX    !t  !t݌̌    XX  !  XX    !A    Soonaftertheaccident,Ms.Robertsconsultedherchiropractor,Dr.ChrisBanning( Dr.  d Banning),concerningherinjuries.Ms.RobertshadbeenseeingDr.Banningonaregularbasis  J priortotheaccident.Dr.BanningtreatedMs.Robertsforayearandahalfbeforereferringher  0 toDr.Anderson,aneurologist,forfurthertesting.Dr.Andersonconductedseveraltestsand    analysisofMs.Roberts.Dr.AndersoncontinuedtotreatMs.Robertsforroughlytwoandahalf    yearsbeforereferringhertoaneuropsychologist,Dr.JimOlson.Dr.Olsonspecializesin   managingchronicpain.However,duringthistime,Ms.Robertswasinvolvedinasubsequent x  accidentinvolvinganothertractortraileronSeptember25,1997.Thereisexistinglitigationin ^  RutherfordCountyregardingthatmatter.!A݌ D  Ќ    XX  !  XX    !D  !D݌̌    XX  !  XX    !    OnMay1,2000,theHonorableJudgeWalterKurtzheldabenchtrialconcerningthe ` accident.Followingaportionoftheproof,Ms.RobertsintendedtocallDr.Olsonasawitness F totestifyonherbehalf.Ms.Robertsandhercounselwereunabletolocatehim.Subsequently, , Ms.Robertsaskedthecourtforarecessandtherecesswasgranted.Followingtherecessand  theremainderofthetrial,Ms.RobertswasnotabletoproduceDr.Olson.Atthatpoint,Ms.  RobertsmovedtoincludeDr.Olsonsdepositionintotherecordasanexhibit.Thetrialcourt  deniedMs.RobertsmotiontoadmitthedepositionbecauseMs.Robertscouldnotproducea t copyofthereturnsummonsdelineatingtherehadinfactbeenonserviceonDr.Olson.OnMay Z 4,2000,JudgeKurtzawardedMs.Robertsajudgmentof$25,000forreasonableandnecessary @ medicalexpenses,painandsufferingandlossofenjoymentoflife,andfordiminutioninearning &v capacitybymeansofaMemorandumandOrder.Ms.Robertslaterfiledthisappeal.!c݌  \ Ќ    XX  !  XX    !%  !%l%݌̌    XX  !  XX    !9&    TheissuesbeforetheCourtregardingthisappealareasfollows:!9&&݌ ( Ќ    XX  !  XX    X!h'  !h''݌  Ќ    XX   : (03G""  X ,E.` hp x (#X(#E  ,  B+4 4` hp x (#X(#BXX(2(  1  )3   4   whetherthetrialcourterredindenyingMs.Robertsmotionforacontinuancebased  upontheabsenceofawitness;()݌   Ќ  ' X(#44` X(#' X  XX!  XX    X XE.` hp x (#X(#E!+  !+V,݌̌    XX  ""   ,XE.` hp x (#X(#E  ,B+4 4` hp x (#X(#BXX,2(  2  )3   4   whetherthetrialcourterredinrefusingtoconsiderDr.Olsonsdepositiontestimony; V"! ,-݌̌  X' X(#44` X(#'   XX!  XX    X!`/  !`//݌̌    XX  ""   ,E.` hp x (#X(#E  ,B+4 4` hp x (#X(#BXX;02(  3  )3   4   whetherthetrialcourterredinawardingMs.Robertsajudgmentoflessthanher %X $ reasonableandnecessarymedicalexpenses;and;0D1݌ %>!% Ќ  ' X(#44` X(#'   XX!  XX    ! 3  ! 3\3݌̌    XX  ""   ,E.` hp x (#X(#E  ,B+4 4` hp x (#X(#BXX32(  4  )3   4   whetherthetrialcourterredfailingtocompensateMs.Robertsforfuturemedical ' #' expenses.34݌ (#( Ќ  ' X(#44` X(#'   XXXX̀II. 8,',  -n(-   ThefirstissuetoconsideriswhetherthetrialcourterredindenyingMs.Robertsmotion  foracontinuance.Amotionforcontinuancelieswithinthesounddiscretionofthetrialjudge.   Statev.Hines ,919S.W.2d573,579(Tenn.1995).Inordertoshowanabuseofdiscretion,it | mustbereasonablyconcludedthatadifferentresultwouldhaveoccurredhadthecontinuance b beengranted. Id. Indeterminingwhethertherewasanabuseofdiscretion,Ms.Robertsmust H showthatshewasprejudicedbythefactthecontinuancewasnotgranted.Therootofthisissue . ~ hingesonthefactsconcerningthesubpoenaofDr.Olsonandhisabsenceatthebenchtrialon  d May1,2000.  J   Whendealingwithserviceofprocess,wemustfirstlooktothecontrollingauthority    delineatedbytheTennesseeRuleofCivilProcedure45.03,whichprovides:        ` Asubpoenamaybeservedbyanypersonauthorizedtoserve x  process, ^     ` orthewitnessmayacknowledgeserviceinwritingonthe D  subpoena. *z     ` Serviceofsubpoenashallbemadebydeliveringorofferingto ` deliver F    ` acopythereoftothepersontowhomitisdirected. ,    ThesubpoenawasissuedonApril14,2000andstampedfiledbytheDavidsonCounty  CircuitCourtClerksOfficeonApril17,2000.TherecordindicatesthatGeneWilkersonofthe  DavidsonCountySheriffsDepartmentservedDr.OlsonwiththesubpoenaonApril21,2000. t ThesubpoenarequiredDr.Olsonsattendanceat8:30a.m.onMay1,2000.Clearly,Ms. Z RobertscompliedwiththisRule.Ms.RobertsattorneyimproperlyreliesontheDavidson @ CountyLocalRule9oftheRulesofPracticeinJuvenileCourttostatehisposition. &v  XInthiscase,theproperlocalruletofollowisDavidsonCountyLocalRule27.05(b), B whichprovides: (  X    ` (b)Absenceofawitnesswillnotbecauseforacontinuanceunless     ` thesubpoenahasbeenissuedanddatedtendayspriortoatrialfor      ` alocalwitnessand14daysforanoutofcountywitness,pursuantto p!     ` LocalRule28.02. V"!    TherecordindicatesthatMs.Robertscouldnotcommunicateorpresentevidencetothe "$r# trialcourtthatinfactasubpoenahadbeenissuedforDr.Olson.ItisimportantforthisCourtto %X $ revisitthetransactionthattookplaceduringthebenchtrialonMay1,2000.Therecordpoints %>!% outthecolloquybetweenthetrialcourtandMs.Robertsattorney,Mr.Hodde: &$"& "  XXXX  X  B+` ` hp x X(#B  "C  TheCourt:Youindicatedthatsubpoenawasmailedtohim.Imnot (#( awarethatitcomplieswiththestatuteonsubpoenas.Infactthereisa )$) specificstatutethatdealswithserviceofprocessbyanattorneyorthe l*%* attorneysagent,sometimesparalegal,lawclerk,orinvestigator,butmy R+&+ recollectionisthatrequiresthatthesubpoenabepersonallyservedonthe 8,', prospectivewitness.IknowforexampleIcantholdawitnessin -n(- contemptforfailuretoappearunlesstheyhavebeenservedconsistent  withthestatute."CD݌  Ќ   X  $ X(#` X $XXXX   XB+` ` hp x X(#BMr.Hodde:ItmaybemootifIcantfindthesubpoenaanyway,butIm b oftheopinionthatwesubpoenaedhimbymail.Ifindneithersubpoena H norDr.Olson.Heisretired.Heobviouslyliveswithinahundredmiles, . ~ butIbelieveundersubpoenaifyouhavethecourtfileanditdoesntshow  d hehasbeensubpoenaed,thenhehasnot.  J TheCourt:Rule43.05,serviceofthesubpoenashallbemadeby    deliveringorofferingtodeliveracopythereoftothepersonwhomitis    directed,anditcommentsthisrulerequirespersonalserviceupona   witnessunlikethepriorpracticeauthorizingleavingacopyofthe x  subpoenaattheusualplaceofresidence. ^  Mr.Hodde:YourHonor,Ihavenothingfurthertoaddtothat.Ifwe *z  didntservehimthroughtheDavidsonCountysheriffsofficeandthereis ` noreturnsummonsinthefile,heissimplynothere. F TheCourt:Thentheproofisclosed. p       XE.` hp x (#` X E  Followingthistrial,Ms.RobertsattorneylaterfoundoutthathisfirmdidserveDr.  OlsonviatheDavidsonCountySheriffsDepartmentandincompliancewithRule43.05. t However,whenaskedinopencourtregardingthemannerofservice,Ms.Robertsattorneywas Z undertheimpressionDr.Olsonwasservedbymail.AtonepointheconcededthatDr.Olson @ mightnothavebeenservedatall.Ms.Robertsattorneyalsoreliesonthefactthatthetrialcourt &v hadthesubpoenaatitsdisposalintherecord.Regardlesswhetherthetrialcourthastherecordat  \ itsdisposalornot,itistheobligationofthemovanttobeadequatelypreparedandpresenttothe B courtthepertinentproof. (  XTherewasnothingkeepingMs.Robertsattorneyfromcheckingtherecordhimselfor  checkingthewiththeDavidsonCountyCircuitClerksofficeforacopyofthesubpoena.The   trialcourtgavethepartiesalonglunchbreak,whichgaveMs.Robertsattorneytheopportunity p!  tolocateDr.Olsonormakealternativeplansconcerningthecase.Thereisnocontrolling V"! authoritythatrequiresjudgestobecomeinvestigators.Ms.Robertswasgivenample <#" opportunitytopresentacopyofthesubpoenatothecourt,howevernocopywasfoundor "$r# presentedtothecourtforreview.JudgeKurtzhadnootherchoicebuttodenytherequestfora %X $ continuancebasedontherepresentationsmadebyMs.Robertsattorney,Mr.Hodde.Weare %>!% notpersuadedbythenotionthatJudgeKurtzabusedhisdiscretionwhenhedeniedthe &$"& continuance. ' #'  X̀III. )$)   Ms.RobertsarguesthetrialcourterredindenyingtheadmissionofDr.Olsons R+&+ depositionfollowingitsrefusaltograntthemotionforacontinuancebasedonDr.Olsons 8,', nonappearanceforthebenchtrial.Ms.Robertsmakestheargumentthatdepositionis -n(- admissibleundertheTennesseeRulesofEvidence804(a)(5)andTennesseeRuleofCivil  Procedure32.01.WewillconsiderRule804(a)(5)first.Rule804providesforcertain  exceptionstothehearsayexclusionaryrulewhenawitnessis unavailable.Unavailabilityis | definedatsubsection(a)(5)asincludingsituationsinwhichthedeclarant isabsentfromthe b hearingandtheproponentofastatementhasbeenunabletoprocurethedeclarantsattendance H byprocess. . ~   Similarly,Rule32.01provides,inpertinentpart,asfollows:  J   ?(` ` hp xX(#?Atatrialoruponthehearingofamotionoraninterlocutory    proceeding,anypartorallofadeposition,sofarasadmissible    undertherulesofevidenceappliedasthoughthewitnesswere   thenpresentandtestifying,maybeusedagainstanypartywhowas x  presentorrepresentedatthetakingofthedepositionorwhohad ^  reasonablenoticethereof,inaccordancewithanyofthefollowing D  provisions: *z  *** F (3)Thedepositionofawitness,whetherornotaparty,maybe  usedbyanypartyforanypurposeifthecourtfinds:8(D)thatthe  partyofferingthedepositionhasbeenunabletoprocurethe  attendanceofthewitnessbysubpoenaorthewitnessisexempt t fromsubpoenatotrialunderT.C.A.249101;or(E)upon Z applicationandnotice,thatsuchexceptionalcircumstancesexistas @ tomakeitdesirable,intheinterestofjusticeandwithdueregard &v totheimportanceofpresentingthetestimonyofwitnessorallyin  \ opencourt,toallowthedepositiontobeused.Notwithstanding B theforegoingprovisions,depositionsofexpertstakenpursuantto ( theprovisionsofRule26.02(4)maynotbeusedatthetrialexcept  toimpeachinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofRule32.01(1).    E.` hp x (#` XxE  Inthiscase,Ms.RobertsfailedtoestablishtheconditionssetforthinbothRule804 p!  (a)(5)and32.01.TherecordindicatesthatthetrialcourtquestionedMs.Robertsattorneyon V"! theadmissibilityofthedepositionasitrelatestoRule32.Ms.Robertsattorneycouldnot <#" articulatetothecourtwhethertherewasasubpoenaissuedforDr.Olsonorhowthedeposition "$r# wouldbeadmissible.Thetrialcourthadnootheroptionbuttodenythedepositioninto %X $ evidenceduringtheproofportionofthetrial.Inaddition,Ms.Robertsattorneyfailedtomake %>!% anofferofproofpursuanttoTennesseeRuleofEvidence103(a)(2),whichwascertainlyaviable &$"& optionforhim.SeeTennesseeRuleofEvidence103(a)(2).Thus,wefindthatthetrialcourt ' #' properlydeniedthedepositionofDr.Olson.   (#( ̀IV. l*%*   ThethirdissueconcernswhetherthetrialcourterredinawardingMs.Robertsanamount 8,', lessthanherprovenmedicalexpenses.Theapplicablestandardofreviewforcasesinvolving -n(- damagesisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionof  correctnessofthefindingunlessevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Tenn.R.App.Proc.13(d);   Crossv.CityofMemphis ,20S.W.3d642,643(Tenn.2000).Damagesinpersonalinjury | casesarenotmeasuredby fixedrulesoflaw,butrestslargelyinthediscretionofthetrierof b factandisentitledtogreatweightintheappellatecourtsintheabsenceofashowingoffraudor H corruption. Coakleyv.Daniels ,840S.W.2d367,372(Tenn.Ct.App.1992).Aplaintiffis . ~ entitledtorecoverforreasonableandnecessarymedicalexpensesacquiredduringthetreatment  d oftheinjury. Hoganv.Reese ,1998WL430627*67(Tenn.Ct.App.1998).Sincethereareno  J  fixedrulesoflawrequiringdamagestobeequaltoorexceedtheprovenmedicalexpenses,the  0 factthatagivenamountisprovenasundisputedmedicalexpensesdoesnotprovethose    expenseswerenecessary. Karasv.Thorne ,531S.W.2d315,31617(Tenn.Ct.App.1975).    Furthermore,physiciansfamiliarwiththeextentandnatureoftheplaintiffsmedicaltreatment   cangiveanopinionregardingthereasonablenessofthephysiciansservicesandcharges. Long x  v.Mattingly ,797S.W.2d889,893(Tenn.Ct.App.1990).Theappellatecourtwillnotreverse ^  thetrialcourtunlessthereisafindingthattheawardofdamagesshowsprejudiceorissogrossly D  inadequateastoshocktheconscienceofthecourt. Id. at31718. *z     `   Intheinstantcase,thetrialcourtawardedMs.Robertsajudgmentintheamountof F $25,000fordamagessustainedasaconsequencetotheaccidentthatoccurredonMay17,1995. , Ms.Robertsofferedtestimonyfromanumberofdoctorswhoclaimedhermedicalexpenses  exceeded$30,000.Dr.JamesP.AndersontestifiedMs.Robertsincurredaminimumof  $31,986.85inreasonableandnecessarymedicalexpensesrelatedtothe1995accident.Further,  thetestimonyofDr.LeonEnsaladaindicatedMs.Robertsreasonableandnecessarymedical t expensestotaled$31,903.85.Similarly,Dr.RichardLisella,FoodLionsexpert,confirmedthat Z $31,903.85inmedicalexpenseswasreasonableandnecessary. @   Theinjuriesresultingfromtheaccidentinvolvedsorenessinherneckandheadaches.  \ TherecordindicatesMs.Robertsinjuriessubsidedsubstantiallya coupleofmonthsafterthe B accident.HersubsequentinjuryinSeptemberof1997complicatesthisdetermination.Ms. ( Robertshasreceivedextensivemedicaltreatmentandfurtherexpensesforseveralyears  followingtheMay17,1995accident.InlieuoftheSeptember1997accident,weareunableto  determinewhetherallofthemedicalexpenseswerereasonableandnecessary.FoodLion   arguedthatonly$8,000inmedicalexpenseswasreasonableandnecessaryduetohersecond p!  accidentoccurringinSeptemberof1997.Withthenumberofquestionssurroundingthe V"! reasonablenessofthemedicalexpenses,wearenotconvincedthatthejudgmentof$25,000isso <#" grosslyinadequateastoshocktheconscienceofthiscourt.Thetrialcourtwasgiventhe "$r# opportunitytoweighthecredibilityofthewitnessesandtheevidenceandmadeasound %X $ determinationintheeyesofthiscourt.Accordingly,thetrialcourtdidnoterrinitsawardof %>!% $25,000toMs.Roberts. &$"& ̀V. (#(   Thelastissuebeforethecourtiswhetherthetrialcourtshouldhaveawardedfuture l*%* medicalexpensestoMs.Roberts.Ms.RobertsdidnotbegintotakeCelebrex,aprescribed R+&+ medication,untilaftertheSeptember1997accident.Obviously,thisisnotattributabletothe 8,', May17,1995accidentandcannotbeallocatedasfuturemedicalexpenses.Anawardoffuture -n(- medicalexpenseswouldbeconsideredawindfallforMs.Roberts,therefore,thetrialcourtwas  correctinfailingtoawardfuturemedicalexpenses.  ̀VI. b   Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxedtothe . ~ appellant,JaniceF.Roberts.  d  h____________________________     h hE.` hp x (#X(#EDONR.ASH,SPECIALJUDGE    XX h  E.` hp x (#X(#E