Law School Case Brief
Davidson v. Prince - 813 P.2d 1225 (Utah Ct. App. 1991)
It is improper to instruct the jury as to the tax consequences of a personal injury or wrongful death award.
Appellant Grant Davidson was injured by a cow or a steer that had escaped from a wrecked truck driven by Erwin M. Prince, an employee of appellee Folkens Brothers Trucking. Subsequently, Davidson filed a negligence action against Prince and Folkens. A jury found appellees 60 percent negligent and appellant 40 percent contributorily negligent. Based on this verdict, the judge entered a judgment in favor of appellant in the amount of $27,323.88 plus interest. Appellant moved for a new trial, contending the trial court had committed three errors of law. First, appellant argued the trial court erred in instructing the jury regarding the tax consequences of a personal injury judgment. Second, appellant contended the trial court erred in precluding his expert from testifying that appellee was negligent. Third, appellant claimed the trial court erred in admitting a statement made in a settlement letter. The court denied this motion. Davidson appeals from the denial of his motion for a new trial.
Did the trial court err in denying plaintiff's motion for new trial?
The court affirmed the denial of the motion; while it was erroneous to instruct jury on tax consequences of a personal injury award, such error was harmless. Also, it was proper to prevent appellant's expert from testifying as to his opinion whether appellee's employee was negligent.
Access the full text case
Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class