813 P.2d 1225 (Utah App. 1991)
Appellant was injured when a cow or steer charged him. The animal had escaped from a truck that had been negligently overturned by appellee employee. There was conflicting evidence whether appellant was partly responsible for his injuries.
- The jury concluded appellant was 40 percent contributorily negligent; denial of appellant's motion for a new trial was affirmed.
- First, while the court agreed that it had been erroneous to instruct the jury on the tax consequences of a personal injury award, under the facts of this case such error was harmless.
- Second, it was proper to not permit appellant's expert to testify as to his opinion whether appellee was negligent, as a determination of negligence is a legal conclusion, not an ultimate issue of fact.
- Finally, a letter written by appellant supporting the contributory negligence claim was properly admitted, as contrary to appellant's argument the letter was not a settlement offer.
Denial of new trial motion affirmed, since while it was erroneous to instruct jury on tax consequences of a personal injury award, such error was harmless here. Also, it had been proper to prevent appellant's expert from testifying as to his opinion whether appellee employee was negligent.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.