 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Terry v. Sweeney9/6/2000
Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County The Honorable W. Thomas Sullins, Judge
This appeal is taken from several trial court orders issued during the course of Plaintiff-Appellant Christina L. Terry's (Terry) personal injury action including orders granting a mistrial, awarding Defendant-Appellee Todd E. Sweeney (Sweeney) costs attendant to mistrial to be paid by Terry, and dismissing the action due to failure to pay the assessed costs. Finding no error or abuse of discretion, we affirm.
ISSUES
This statement of the issues is found in Terry's brief:
1. When the district court conditions a litigant's access and ability to have her cause of action heard upon payment of costs in a sum that the district court is aware that the litigant cannot afford to pay, ha the litigant's state and federal constitutional rights of access to the courts, due process, and equal protection been improperly denied[?]
2. Whether the district court erred in declaring a mistrial because of the inadvertent reference by one of the Plaintiffs to the possibility that Defendant had liability insurance.
3. Whether the district court has any statutory or inherent power to assess attorney fees and costs resulting from a mistrial, and then to require payment of these fees and costs, prior to allowing the retrial of the matter.
4. If the assessment of fees and costs was proper, should it have been assessed only against the Plaintiff, Dale Sprague[?]
5. Whether the district court should have delayed assessing costs resulting from the mistrial by requiring their payment until after the retrial of the matter.
6. When the district court made the payment of Defendant's fees and costs from the mistrial a precondition to a retrial of the matters, did the district court abuse its discretion by not allowing Plaintiffs' counsel to advance said costs[?]
7. Whether the district court erred by allowing Defendant to refer to the fact that Plaintiff had filed several worker[']s compensation claims for injuries not related to the subject injury in order to infer to the jury that she was "claims minded."
8. Whether the district court erred by denying Plaintiffs' request to present expert rebuttal testimony.
Sweeney restates the issues in his brief as follows:
1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting a mistrial[.]
2. Whether sanctions directed to costs and attorney's fees associated with preparation for a particular jury trial may be properly imposed for a mistrial.
3. Whether, given the totality of the circumstances, it was appropriate to dismiss with prejudice for failure to prosecute and to comply with prior orders of the Court.
4. Whether imposition of sanctions denies access to the courts, procedural due process or equal protection.
5. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in holding that evidence relating to Worker's Compensation claims were admissible and in denying leave to present rebuttal testimony.
FACTS
On December 23, 1994, Terry and her then-husband, Dale E. Sprague (Sprague), filed suit for damages against Sweeney, alleging his negligence caused a motor vehicle accident on April 19, 1993. The trial court granted a motion in limine which precluded the plaintiffs from making any reference to Sweeney having insurance coverage pursuant to W.R.E. 411. The court qualified the preclusion to permit limited inquiry of jurors regarding their professional relationships with insurance companies and the threshold questions as allowed under Wardell v. McMillan,
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wyoming Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|