Civ Pro 1
PROBLEM#9

Plaintiff sues Defendants One, Two, and Three in a federal court. They each generally deny liability and tender the affirmative defense of comparative negligence.
Plaintiff’s trial evidence is that the defendant driver and his two passengers were all drinking heavily, pursuant to eye-witness testimony. They are named in the complaint as “D1” (driver age 16), “D2” (driver’s father) and “D3” (driver’s uncle)......
The evidence showed that Defendant D1 is a minor and was the designated driver for the adult passengers. D2 and D3 were admittedly drunk and rowdy.
The defense evidence included that Plaintiff had consumed several glasses of wine just prior to the accident.
The judge gave instructions on negligence, comparative negligence, and the statute of limitations.
The jury verdict and the parties’ timely cross-motions are set forth in the Filebelow......
......
Questions:
1.Was there any problem with the judge’s instructions? ......
2. Was there a problem with the jury verdict (below)?......
3.How should the court rule on the defendants’alternative motions (below)?......
4. What should have happened at the trial stage to avoid the verdict problems?

...... FILE
...... VERDICT

Questions to be answered by jury: / Answer / ..% fault each party/amount
1. / What was the amount of the plaintiff’s total damages proven at trial? / $100,000.00
2. / Was Defendant One negligent? / Yes
3. / Was Defendant Two negligent? / Yes
4. / Was Defendant Three negligent? / Yes
5. / Was the plaintiff negligent? / Yes
6. / If your answer to #5 was “Yes,” was the plaintiff’s negligence a “substantial factor”in causing her injuries? / No
7. / What was the percentage of negligence for each party?
(a)Minor child / .D1 / 10%
(b) Minor’s father / D2 / 40%
(c)Minor’s uncle / D3 / 40%
(d) Plaintiff / P / 10%
8. / What is your general verdict? / We hold for the Plaintiff. / $90,000.00.We further hold that D1 should pay $1.00 in damages.

...... DEFENDANT’S MOTION

Pat Plaintiff
...... v.
D1, D2, and D3 / ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS for JUDGMENT or NEW TRIAL
(FRCP 50 and 59)
The defendants lodge this post-trial motion seeking the following alternative relief, which is necessitated by the judgment in Pat Plaintiff v. Ds 1-3:
.....(a) Motion for Judgment, based on the facts produced at trial
[at this point, the Ds restate various facts, including all the above facts]; and in the alternative,
.....(b) Motion for New Trial, based on:
...... (i) errors in the jury’s verdict; and that
...... (ii) the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
Mary Jones, Esq.
Bar No. 165123
DEWEY, CHEATEM & HOWE
Attorneys for Defendants