During a motor vehicle accident jury trial, the defendant requested that the jury be asked to provide particulars of the defendant's negligence and list the plaintiff's injuries if liability was found.
The plaintiff opposed these questions.
The court reviewed the historical practice and case law regarding jury questions, noting both advantages and disadvantages.
The court concluded that in this case, where negligence was essentially res ipsa loquitur and the medical evidence was conflicting, asking for particulars would not assist in testing the jury's understanding and could unnecessarily confuse them.
The request to include the questions was denied.
