There is no duty to anticipate and take precautions against the negligence of another person.
Appellants, railroad company and employed, appealed the district court's judgment which awarded appellee railroad worker damages and found that appellee's negligence had been only one-third responsible for the railroad. Appellee railroad worker suffered severe injury and a jury awarded monetary damages against appellants, railroad company and employer. The jury also allocated fault amongst appellants. On appeal, appellants claimed that the jury allocated too small a share of responsibility for the accident to appellee.
Whether the jury's trial court verdict allocating fault in a negligence matter to appellee was unreasonable or irrational?
The court found no merit to appellants' claim and affirmed the jury's verdict. The court held that although the jury may well have underestimated appellee's relative fault, its decision was neither unreasonable nor irrational. The court also held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of negligence on the part of both appellants.
The court affirmed the jury verdict that awarded appellee railroad worker monetary damages and allocated fault between appellant railroad company and employer. The court found that even though the jury probably allocated too little of the Blake for the accident to appellee, the error in doing so was not of such a magnitude as to call into question the rationality of its verdict on whether appellants were liable.