Frazier v. Alvarado

── Frazier v. Alvarado ── Case No.: 25-1056 Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: March 27, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-1056 Document: 36-1 Date Filed: 03/27/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT March 27, 2026 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court TERRY FRAZIER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. No. 25-1056 (D.C. No. 1:21-CV-00970-GPG-NRN) JOSUE ALVARADO; STEVENS (D. Colo.) TRANSPORT, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, BALDOCK, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Terry Frazier, proceeding pro se, 1 appeals the district court’s entry of judgment after a jury verdict in favor of Josue Alvarado and Stevens Transport in a After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined * unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Because Mr. Frazer proceeds pro se, we construe his arguments liberally, but 1 we “cannot take on the responsibility of serving as [his] attorney in constructing arguments and searching the record.” Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer, 425 F.3d 836, 840 (10th Cir. 2005).  Appellate Case: 25-1056 Document: 36-1 Date Filed: 03/27/2026 Page: 2 negligence suit arising from a trucking accident. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Mr. Frazier, represented by counsel throughout the district court proceedings, sued the defendants in state court in 2021. In his lawsuit, Mr. Frazier alleged Mr. Alvarado struck his parked tractor-trailer while backing a commercial tractor- trailer into a parking spot at a travel center. He further alleged that he was asleep in the cab of his tractor-trailer at the time of the collision, so he fell off his bunk and suffered neck and back injuries. The defendants removed the lawsuit to federal court, which exercised diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. They admitted Mr. Alvarado was acting in the course and scope of his employment during the accident and admitted he caused the accident. But they disputed whether Mr. Frazier suffered damages and whether their negligence caused any damages he suffered. The parties tried the case before a jury. The jury found that Mr. Frazier did, in fact, suffer damages, but it did not find that the defendants’ negligence caused any claimed damages. So, the district court entered judgment in favor of the defendants and against Mr. Frazier. This appeal followed. Mr. Frazier raises five issues on appeal: (1) “[w]hether the district court erred in failing to find [the defendants’] negligent operation of a commercial vehicle directly caused [his] . . . injuries, despite clear evidence of the collision and resulting medical damages,” (2) whether his own