 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Daley v. Wenzel8/30/2001
Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County The Honorable Harry E. Leimback, Retired
[ ] In this appeal we consider several issues surrounding a judgment resulting from a personal injury accident. We affirm the judgment in all respects.
ISSUES
[ ] Beverly and Robert Wenzel state the issues for the Court's consideration:
A. Whether W.S. § 1-39-118(a), which limits to $250,000 the amount of damages recoverable by a single claimant from a governmental entity, violates Article 10, Section 4 of the Wyoming Constitution, which bars the legislature from enacting limits on the amount of damages to be recovered for causing the injury or death of any person.
B. The trial court erred in giving jury instruction stating that no person who has legally provided alcoholic liquor or malt beverage to any other person is liable for damages caused by the intoxication of the other person, when the instruction did not address any issue to be decided by the jury at trial, was cumulative of other instructions so that it overemphasized the issue of Mrs. Wenzel's intoxication, and was confusing as it stood in conflict with other negligence instructions.
C. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment dismissing Plaintiff's dram shop claim, or whether the grant of immunity from dram shop liability contained in W.S. § 12-8-301(a) is unconstitutional under the equal protection provisions of the Wyoming constitution.
The Lounge Bar states the issues slightly differently:
I. Whether the trial court properly instructed the jury on Wyoming Statute § 12-8-301(a) concerning dram shop immunity.
II. Whether Appellants Daley, Eastes and Shepard waived their right to object to the giving of Instruction No. 24 concerning dram shop immunity when they failed to make any objection prior to the submission of the instructions to the jury.
III. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict finding The Lounge Bar 0% at fault.
IV. Whether Appellant Beverly Wenzel failed to properly challenge the constitutionality of Wyoming Statute § 12-8-301(a) at the trial court level, thereby waiving her right to present this issue on appeal.
V. Whether W.S. § 12-8-301(a) providing immunity from dram shop liability violates the equal protection provisions of the Wyoming Constitution.
Finally, Officers Daley, Eastes and Shepard (Officers) raise the following issues:
I. Did the district court commit prejudicial and/or plain error when it instructed the jury on Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 12-8-301 concerning dram shop immunity thereby misleading and confusing the jury on the applicable principles of law?
II. Was the jury's verdict finding the Lounge Bar free from liability supported by sufficient evidence?
FACTS
[ ] On the afternoon of Friday, May 13, 1994, Beverly Wenzel accompanied her husband, Robert, and their daughter, Julie, to a bar in Casper, Wyoming. The threesome remained at the bar until approximately 6:00 p.m. and then departed for home. Beverly consumed some amount of alcohol while at the bar, but the exact amount was later disputed at trial.
[ ] After returning home, Beverly decided to go to another bar while Robert remained at the house. She arrived at The Lounge Bar sometime between 7:45 p.m. and midnight, the exact time again being disputed at trial. The parties also disputed whether Beverly was intoxicated at the time she reached The Lounge Bar.
[ ] Beverly entered The Lounge Bar and sat on her "usual" bar stool. She consumed more alcohol, again the precise amount
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Wyoming Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|