 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Walker v. the8/6/1992 ve value, especially in light of the fact that the decedent drove the road many times between the initiation of the marina project and his death. Moreover, the trial court admitted numerous exhibits showing the changes in the road from 1984 to the time of the accident -- evidence giving the plaintiff ample opportunity to argue her theory of the case. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it found the 1980 photos irrelevant.
[14, 15] As plaintiff was prejudiced by the use of erroneous jury instructions, a new trial is necessary. Plaintiff asks that the new trial be limited to the issue of Mr. Walker's contributory negligence. However, there is a general presumption in favor of a new trial on all issues. See Bauman v. Complita, 66 Wash. 2d 496, 502, 403 P.2d 347 (1965). Further, in this case the issues of defendants' liability and Mr. Walker's fault are so intertwined that a jury could not fairly decide one in isolation without danger of injustice to the other. Cramer v. Bock, 21 Wash. 2d 13, 17, 149 P.2d 525 (1944). Therefore we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for a new trial on both liability and comparative negligence issues.
Disposition
Holding that two instructions given were erroneous and prejudicial and that a new trial should not be limited to the issue of the decedent's comparative negligence, the court reverses the judgment and remands the case for a new trial on all issues.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|