by Becky Hartley staff writer A Carroll County jury found for the plaintiff in the amount of $84,000, in Billy Ray Adams vs City of Delphi. The plaintiff, Adams, had filed suit as a result of a traffic accident which occurred June 25, 1991. While Adams was on Washington Street, waiting to turn left onto to Water Street,when his vehicle was struck in the rear by former Delphi Police Officer Dale Seward’s patrol car, Adams claimed that “Officer Seward was negligent in the cause of the collision as a result of which he suffered personal injuries; incurred medical expenses; has permanent injuries; will incur future medical expenses; and lost income.” The defendant acknowledged that Seward was ‘at fault in the collision but denied that “the collision caused the plaintiff serious permanent injury or extensive medical expense.” The city asserted that “the plaintiff is not disabled and that it is uncertain whether his current low back and left leg pain” was caused by “the collision or other conditions or events.” Carroll Circuit Court Judge Joseph Carey presided at the trial and according to the court’s preliminary instructions, “it is the plaintiff who has the burden to prove the claims.” Subsequent to the four-day trial, the jury began deliberation at 4:12 p.m. on March 22 and returned with a verdict at 7:45 p.m. Following the verdict, Delphi Police Chief Larry Ives was reluctant to comment as he stated he was not police chief at the time of the accident. Delphi City Attorney Jim Huffer was not involved in the proceedings as the City’s case was handled by Al Harker of Marion, an attorney for the insurance carrier. Defense testimony was presented by former Delphi Police Chief Roland “Dick” Rowe, as to the investigative stage of the accident. This was due to the fact that he was the investigating officer. Seward answered interrogatories at the onset of the suit, but was not subpoenaed to testify for the city. When asked to comment, Seward indicated that he was somewhat perplexed as to why he was not called as’a first-hand witness, feeling that “questions about speed, the air bag not activating, and the working condition of the anti lock brakes, perhaps may have been valued by the jury.”