Smith v. White
213 N.C. App. 189
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Motorcycle accident on 19 September 2007; Smith alleges White left-turn collision caused injuries and motorcycle damage.
- Smith sues White on 2 April 2008; White asserts contributory negligence by Smith as defense.
- White pays repairs to Smith's motorcycle; trial court excludes evidence of repair cost as to damages.
- Jury verdict on 21 January 2009: White negligent; Smith not liable for contributory negligence; no diminution in value.
- Rule 59 motion for new trial filed 1 February 2009; amended judgment 19 March 2010 awards medical costs to Smith and costs to White under Rule 68; new trial granted only as to diminution in value.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the new trial on diminution in value was proper | Smith contends the trial court correctly granted the new trial on diminution in value. | White contends the trial court erred in granting a new trial on diminution in value. | Affirmed; new trial on diminution in value proper. |
| Whether submitting contributory negligence to the jury was error | Smith argues trial court erred by submitting contributory negligence to the jury. | White argues the issue should have gone to the jury, or the court should have directed a verdict for Smith. | Dismissed; plaintiff not aggrieved by decision. |
| Whether the verdict was a compromise verdict | Smith argues jury used a compromised verdict; compelling new trial on negligence. | White argues there was no compromise and medical expenses do not show it. | Denied; no abuse of discretion; not a compromise verdict. |
| Whether costs to defendant were proper under Rule 68 | Smith argues costs should be awarded to plaintiff or denied to defendant under Rule 68. | White argues costs awarded to defendant were proper after Rule 68 offer. | Affirmed; costs awarded to defendant not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. P. & F. Motor Express, Inc., 220 N.C. 721 (1942) (measures damages for property injury; admissibility of repair costs varies by actual vs. estimated costs)
- Sprinkle v. N.C. Wildlife Res. Comm'n, 165 N.C.App. 721 (2004) (allows evidence of repair cost to inform diminution in value; double recovery not necessarily precluded)
- Kor Xiong v. Marks, 193 N.C.App. 644 (2008) (Rule 59(a)(8) de novo standard for error in law occurring at trial)
- Greene v. Royster, 187 N.C.App. 71 (2007) (supports de novo review for Rule 59(a)(8) errors)
- Philco Finance Corp. v. Mitchell, 26 N.C.App. 264 (1975) (early consideration of Rule 59 standards and damages framework)
- Maness v. Bullins, 27 N.C.App. 214 (1975) (compromise verdict regarding pain and suffering versus medical damages)
- Digsby v. Gregory, 35 N.C.App. 59 (1978) (limits on appellate review of jury verdicts when issues favoring plaintiff)
- Craig v. Calloway, 68 N.C.App. 143 (1984) (juror testimony prohibition post-verdict)
- Hughes v. Rivera-Ortiz, 187 N.C.App. 214 (2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for new trial determinations)
- Gaskins v. Blount Fertilizer Co., 260 N.C. 191 (1963) (aggrieved party requirement for appellate review)
- Vaden v. Dombrowski, 187 N.C.App. 433 (2007) (abuse of discretion standard for costs decisions)