Following a civil jury trial arising from a motor vehicle accident involving an intoxicated driver and alleged commercial host over-service, the appellant bar challenged the trial judge’s decision to set aside the jury’s $0 award for future income loss and substitute his own assessment.
The Court of Appeal held that the common law and Rule 52.08 threshold for disregarding a jury verdict were not met because there was some evidence supporting the jury’s conclusion.
The court upheld the trial costs award, rejecting the argument that the successful plaintiff should have been deprived of costs.
On the cross appeal, the court rejected requests for a new trial based on counsel conduct and trial complexity, but held that the jury questions and instructions on apportionment of liability were legally flawed under the commercial host framework and the Negligence Act.
Rather than ordering a new trial, the court directed that apportionment be resolved by agreement or further written submissions, with no costs of the appeal and cross appeal.
