ST. LOUIS — The Missouri Supreme Court has affirmed a $300,000 judgment in favor of a woman who sued Dynamic Fitness Management Ltd. for negligence after sustaining an injury during a group fitness class.
The court rejected Dynamic’s claims of legal errors in the trial process, finding the company failed to preserve its arguments for appellate review, according to the March 18 opinion in the Supreme Court of Missouri.
Melissa Moody, a member of a St. Louis gym where Dynamic provided training services, was injured in May 2013 while attempting a push press exercise under the supervision of a Dynamic trainer.
After completing a set with a 65-pound barbell, the trainer added more weight and instructed Moody to perform additional repetitions.
On her third lift, she experienced severe pain in her neck, shoulders and back, which was later diagnosed as a herniated disc requiring two surgeries.
Dynamic argued Moody assumed the risk of injury by engaging in weightlifting and signing a liability waiver.
However, a jury found the company 30% at fault and Moody 70% responsible, awarding her $1 million in damages.
Under Missouri’s comparative fault law, the judgment was reduced to $300,000.
On appeal, Dynamic contended the circuit court erred by denying its motions for a directed verdict on its defenses of implied and express assumption of the risk.
The Supreme Court dismissed this claim, noting Dynamic did not file a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), a necessary procedural step to preserve the issue for appeal.
Without such a motion, the court held Dynamic had no grounds for relief.
Dynamic also challenged the circuit court’s decision to allow Moody to present adverse inference admissions to the jury, arguing the court improperly sanctioned the company for alleged spoliation of evidence.
During the trial, Moody asserted Dynamic destroyed key evidence and requested adverse inferences, which the court granted.
Dynamic objected before the trial began, but the Supreme Court ruled that failing to renew the objection during the trial meant the issue was not preserved for appellate review.
Furthermore, Dynamic claimed that the jury’s instructions improperly gave the jurors a “roving commission” to interpret the evidence without clear guidance.
Specifically, the company criticized the verdict director’s instruction that outlined multiple potential negligent acts.
The court, however, concluded the instructions complied with Missouri’s approved guidelines and clearly required the jury to find that Dynamic’s negligence directly caused Moody’s injuries.
Moody’s case relied heavily on testimony from her former personal trainer, who explained that Dynamic’s trainers were responsible for conducting initial assessments to evaluate clients' physical capabilities and prevent injury.
The jury found sufficient evidence that Dynamic’s failure to assess Moody’s fitness level and properly supervise her during the class directly contributed to her injury.
With the Supreme Court's ruling, Dynamic Fitness Management Ltd. remains liable for the $300,000 judgment plus post-judgment interest.
Dynamic Fitness was represented by Bradley R. Hansmann, Christine Lesicko and Travis S. McDonald of Watters Wolf Bub & Hansmann LLC in St. Louis
Moody was represented by Michael T. Harrison of Harrison Law Firm in St. Louis and Shannon M. Dawson of Dawson Law Firm LLC in St. Louis.
Attorneys for the parties declined to comment further on the case.
Missouri Supreme Court case number: SC100711