Opinion ID: 2495846
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: Jury Instruction Numbers 10 and 11 (shadows and driveway)

Text: ¶ 56. Leah and Dewey challenge the trial court's grant of jury instruction numbers 10 and 11, which prohibited the jury from apportioning fault for the dark shadows along the roadway or the alleged narrow and steep condition of Smith's driveway. ¶ 57. Jury instruction number 10 stated: If you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the condition of the driveway contributed to the accident then such contribution is not attributable to any party in this case. ¶ 58. Jury instruction number 11 stated: If you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the condition of the shadows contributed to the accident, then such contribution is not attributable to any party in this case. At trial, Leah and Dewey argued that both were vague and would confuse the jury. On appeal, they add that the shadows and the driveway should have been considered by the jury. Leah and Dewey imply that the fault for both should be apportioned to Byrd and Independent Roofing. ¶ 59. Issues regarding shadows or the driveway are factual considerations that should have been available to the jury. Because jury instructions numbers 10 and 11 improperly removed fact issues from the jury's consideration, the trial court erred in granting both instructions. Mariner Health Care, Inc., 964 So.2d at 1156.