Davis v. Maute, 770 A.2d 36, Veasey, C.J. (Del. 2001).
This case involved a negligence action to recover for soft tissue back, neck, and rib injuries allegedly suffered in an automobile collision for which the defendant conceded liability. Defense counsel argued that the collision amounted to a "fender-bender" and argued for the admissibility of photographs of the damaged vehicle, both without the support of expert testimony, to minimize personal injury damages because the damage to the vehicle was minor. The Delaware Supreme Court held that absent expert testimony, both medical and biomechanical, correlating seriousness of injuries to seriousness of property damage, defense counsel's characterization of "fender-bender" was improper. Additionally, the Court held that the admission of photographs showing the degree of damage to a party's vehicle to support the degree of injury was also improper.