Opinion ID: 1355930
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Participation of Codefendant.

Text: Roy strongly objected to counsel for Craun preparing and tendering to the court instructions as to the duty owed by Roy to Beulah. We see nothing improper or anomalous in this. Trial counsel prepare and tender instructions to assist the court in delineating the issues for the jury. The court gives the instructions as its own. Jurors never know the instructions' origin. Our sole responsibility in reviewing the matter is to see that the law has been clearly stated and that the instructions cover all issues which the evidence fairly raises. E.I. DuPont Snead's Amr., 124 Va. 177, 97 S.E. 812 (1919). Further, counsel for the codefendant does not try his case in isolation, but is concerned with what occurs between another co-defendant and the plaintiff. Counsel for Craun had a perfect right to proffer any defense which showed that Craun was not liable at all, or, if liable, that she shared liability jointly with another codefendant. We know of nothing in our adversary system which requires that each defendant act as if his liability had been severed from that of a codefendant. See Monday Oliver and Doe, 215 Va. 748, 214 S.E.2d 142 (1975).   Roy challenged Craun's right to offer instructions as to Roy's potential liability to Beulah, citing Walton, Witten & Graham Miller, 109 Va. 210, 63 S.E. 458 (1909). This precedent became obsolete when Code | 5779 was added to the Code of 1919, (present Code | 8.01-34), providing contribution among negligent tortfeasors.