In the District Court appellant was awarded a jury verdict against appellees for injuries growing out of the collision between a motorcycle he was-riding and a truck which was owned by one of the appellees and operated by the other. Although the evidence was sufficient to support such an instruction the court denied appellant’s request for an instruction that should the jury find in his favor they should take into consideration, in determining the amount of damages, the reasonable value of the time he had lost from his employment.
Within the principles laid down by this Court in Hudson v. Lazarus,
We have power in an appropriate case to remand only for redetermination of the amount of damages, excluding from the scope of a new trial the question of liability, see Washington Gas Light Co. v. Connolly,
Reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.
Notes
. See, also, Siebrand v. Gossnell, 9 Cir.,
. Appellant as a member of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia, which continued his salary something more than 20 weeks until he returned to duty.
