Honsickle

This is the latest in a series of cases which involve the scope and application of Proposition 213, enacted by the voters on November 5, 1996. Essentially, this initiative prohibits (1) recovery of any damages by a convicted felon for injuries caused in the commission of or flight from tiie felony (Civ. Code, § 3333.3) and (2) recovery of noneconomic damages by any drunk driver, uninsured driver or uninsured owner arising out of the operation or use of a motor vehicle. (Civ. Code, § 3333.4) The issue presented here poses the question of whether Civil Code section 3333.4, subdivision (a), can be applied retroactively to preclude a recovery of noneconomic damages by an uninsured driver who (1) had attempted but failed to purchase the required liability insurance, (2) was injured due to the negligence of another, and (3) filed an action to recover damages therefore, all prior to the passage of Proposition 213.

The petitioners, Earl Joseph Honsickle and Ethel Honsickle (hereafter petitioners) are the defendants whose negligence allegedly caused bodily injury to the plaintiffs Iwona Wysocki (Iwona) and Tomasz Wysocki (Tomasz) (collectively the Wysockis). When petitioners…