Sykes v. Sin

Nin Sin (defendant) caused a collision that damaged Thomas Sykes’s (plaintiff) car. At trial, the only evidence concerning the car’s value immediately prior to and immediately following the collision was Sykes’s testimony. Sykes testified that, in his opinion, the car’s value immediately before the collision was $9,000 to $10,000. Sykes did not support his opinion with testimony concerning the car’s overall condition or the manner in which he had maintained it. Instead, Sykes testified that he had reached his opinion concerning the car’s value by referring to classified ads for similar cars and by talking to other car owners. Sykes also described the damage to the car immediately after the wreck and stated that he believed a junkyard would have paid him $1,000 for the car but that he had not called any junkyards for estimates. The trial court determined that Sykes had not proven the value of the car before the wreck or its value after the wreck. The court granted a partial directed verdict to Sin, reasoning that, because property damages are based on the difference between the property’s value immediately before an injury and immediately after an injury, Sykes was unable to prove damages. The jury found Sin liable for the collision but did not award damages. The trial court denied Sykes’s motion for a new trial, and Sykes appealed.