Montague v. Deagle
In Montague v. Deagle, 11 Ariz. App. 106, 108, 462 P.2d 403, 405 (1969), the plaintiff suffered head injuries in an automobile accident. 11 Ariz. App. at 108, 462 P.2d at 405.
While in the hospital after the accident, she experienced dizziness. Id.
She had had prior episodes of dizziness, but not within the four years immediately preceding the accident. Her doctor indicated that the accident could have caused her existing symptoms. Id. at 109, 462 P.2d at 406. The defendants contended that plaintiff had not shown a causal connection between the dizziness and the accident. Id. at 108, 462 P.2d at 405.
The Court noted the general rule that medical testimony that an accident "possibly" had a causal relationship to a condition was insufficient to support a finding that the accident caused the condition, but that "if there is medical evidence of the possibility of the existence of the causal relationship together with other evidence or circumstances indicating such a relationship, the finding that the accident caused the injury will be sustained." Id. at 108, 462 P.2d at 405.
The Court held that the doctor's testimony plus the evidence that the plaintiff suffered head injuries, that she had had no symptoms of dizziness in the four years immediately preceding the accident, and that the dizziness had recurred immediately after the accident was sufficient to show a causal connection between the accident and the dizziness. Id. at 109, 462 P.2d at 406.