 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Shelton v. Greater Cleveland Reg. Transit Auth.12/18/1989
liability. As this court has determined and as the transit authority has maintained throughout these proceedings, the plaintiff had no basis for obtaining relief for her injuries from the transit authority. Accordingly, the transit authority had no obligation to tender any settlement offer although the record establishes that the transit authority in fact offered a $40,000 settlement prior to trial. We conclude that the trial court correctly exercised its discretion in denying the motion for prejudgment interest.
The plaintiff further contends that the trial court erred in excluding evidence, at the hearing on the plaintiff's motion, of the transit authority's failure to cooperate in pretrial discovery. However, any error in the trial court's ruling would be harmless since the transit authority had no duty to settle the case due to its objective, reasonable belief that it had no liability. Cf. Evid.R. 103(A) (error must affect substantial right of complaining party).
Accordingly, we overrule the plaintiff's two assignments of error and affirm the trial court's denial of her motion for prejudgment interest. Based upon our disposition of the transit authority's first assignment of error, we order judgment for the transit authority on the plaintiff's claim.
Judgment accordingly.
DAVID T. MATIA, P.J., and MITROVICH J., concur.
PAUL H. MITROVICH, J., of the Lake County Court of Common Pleas, sitting by assignment.
|