SYNOPSIS: Appellant freight line sought review of a judgment from the United States District Court in favor of appellees, driver and owner, in appellees' negligence suit arising from a truck collision. Appellant sought review on grounds that a jury charge and evidentiary ruling were made in error.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 51 provides, in pertinent part, that no party may assign as error the giving or the failure to give an instruction unless he objects thereto before the jury retires to consider its verdict, stating distinctly the matter to which he objects and the grounds of his objection. Opportunity shall be given to make the objection out of the hearing of the jury.
OUTCOME: The judgment in favor of appellees, driver and owner, in their negligence suit against appellant freight line was affirmed. Appellant could not complain of an improper jury charge as to the burden of proof of contributory negligence because it failed to timely and formally object before the jury retired to deliberate. A rehabilitative witness was properly excluded after appellant's driver was impeached during cross-examination.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?