Opinion ID: 1196743
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: failure to allege amount of damages

Text: In contending for error in the failure of appellee to allege in her complaint or in her answers to interrogatories the amount of damages sought by her, appellant argues that it was improperly and totally in the dark and subject to surprise on the specific amount of damages sought by appellee in the action until the time of trial. In her complaint, appellee stated that her claim exceeds One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) and is sufficient to establish jurisdiction of this court. In the prayer of the complaint, appellee demanded judgment in an amount sufficient to compensate her for her all [sic] injuries suffered as a result of defendant's negligence as indicated by the facts and the law and for such other and further relief as the court deems proper. [3] Among interrogatories directed to appellee by appellant was a request to itemize your alleged damages. Appellee's response was: Special damages known at this time are these: Medicals, $122.72 and Lost Wages, $625.00. Appellant did not take appellee's deposition; it did not make further inquiry concerning general damages; it did not object to the testimony by appellee and two other witnesses relative to the inability of appellee to perform tasks after the incident in the same fashion as such were performed by her prior to the incident; it did not object to testimony concerning pain and suffering; and a pretrial conference was not held. Generally, the record is barren of any effort to present this issue to the trial court. Normally, we do not consider matters raised for the first time on appeal unless they go to jurisdiction or are otherwise of such fundamental nature that we must take cognizance of them. Schaefer v. Lampert Lumber Company, Wyo., 591 P.2d 1225 (1979); Scherling v. Kilgore, Wyo., 599 P.2d 1352 (1979). I will not here further consider this issue except to note that appellant has not set forth in what manner it is prejudiced by the lack of knowledge as to the extent of general damages claimed by appellee. If the exact amount of general damages were known to appellant, there is no suggestion that such would have enabled appellant to have obtained and presented counter evidence. Absent the showing of actual prejudice, the error, if any would be harmless. Any error, defect, irregularity or variance which does not affect substantial rights shall be disregarded. Rule 7.04, W.R.A.P. I would affirm, but not for the reasons stated in the majority opinion.