Opinion ID: 1143673
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Photographs of the Parties' Respective Residences.

Text: The Murrays claim photographs of their house and the Feights' Wyoming mobile home were highly prejudicial, irrelevant and should not have been admitted. The Feights' response is persuasive: One factor the jury was required to consider in awarding punitive damages was the wealth of the Murrays. E.g., Clary Ins. Agcy. v. Doyle, 620 P.2d 194, 205 (Alaska 1980). The Murrays' failure to respond to court-ordered discovery relating to wealth substantially hampered the Feights' ability to introduce evidence as to this factor. The photograph of the Murrays' home was relevant to the issue of wealth, as was the fact that Mrs. Murray had recently traveled to Juneau from Seattle first class. Moreover, the Murrays' absence from trial made it impossible for the Feights to elicit trial testimony from the Murrays concerning their wealth. As to the Feights' trailer, this evidence is relevant to the Feights' claim that they have been in difficult financial circumstances since the re-entry of their store. It was not plain error for the court to admit this evidence.