79 A.3d 1262
R.I.2013Background
- Gomes sued Rosario over a collision at the Pine Street—Marrin Street intersection in Pawtucket on Sept. 23, 2003.
- Jury found Gomes failed to prove Rosario negligent by a preponderance of the evidence.
- Gomes moved for a new trial, and the trial justice granted it, citing the jury’s ‘no liability’ verdict and unclear instructions.
- Two independent witnesses, Baldera and Smith, testified Rosario ran a red light; both were deemed highly credible by the trial court.
- Officer Pereira’s police report and a traffic citation for Rosario for failure to obey a traffic control device were introduced; Rosario paid the citation and did not contest it.
- Court of appeals reviewed a bench decision and affirmed the new-trial order, holding the trial court properly weighed evidence and credibility and that the verdict did not respond to the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the trial court err in granting a new trial? | Gomes argues the verdict responded to the evidence; new trial was improper. | Rosario contends the verdict should stand; no basis to overturn. | affirmed the new-trial order |
| Was the trial justice's weighing of evidence and witness credibility proper? | Gomes asserts the court misweighed the evidence in favor of Rosario’s account. | Rosario asserts the jury’s verdict reflected the weight of the evidence. | trial court properly weighed evidence and credibility; deference owed |
| Did the jury’s verdict properly respond to the material evidence showing Rosario’s red-light violation? | Gomes argues the independent witnesses supported negligence; verdict rejected those facts. | Rosario argues the verdict was not required to reflect the red-light evidence. | verdict did not respond to the evidence; new trial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- McGarry v. Pielech, 47 A.3d 271 (R.I. 2012) (trial court's role as superjuror; defer to lower court on credibility)
- Pollard v. Hastings, 862 A.2d 770 (R.I. 2004) (trial court credibility assessment guiding new-trial analysis)
- Morgera v. Hanover Insurance Co., 655 A.2d 698 (R.I. 1995 (mem.)) (verdict must respond to evidence and administer substantial justice)
- Botelho v. Caster’s, Inc., 970 A.2d 541 (R.I. 2009) (great weight given to trial court’s findings on new trial)
- Bonn v. Pepin, 11 A.3d 76 (R.I. 2011) (trial judge need not exhaustively recount all evidence)
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Care of New England, Inc. v. Gelati, 865 A.2d 1028 (R.I. 2004) (trial court credibility and evidentiary weighing favored)
- Bourdon’s, Inc. v. Ecin Industries, Inc., 704 A.2d 747 (R.I. 1997) (balance of facts and credibility supports trial decision)