Opinion ID: 2419677
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Incidental Expenses

Text: Appellant argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the measure of damages included incidental damages. The trial court instructed the jury that in awarding damages to Appellee it could consider: The difference in the fair market value of his truck immediately before and immediately after the occurrence plus a reasonable amount for loss of use and other incidential [sic] expenses; such as storage fee. We do not decide this issue because the total award of damages of $26,400 appears to include only the fair market value of Appellee's truck, which is provided for in the AMI damage instruction, loss of use, and storage expenses, which Appellant conceded was allowable. Thus, even though, arguably, the trial court may have erred in instructing the jury as to other incidental expenses, the error was harmless because Appellee was not awarded any such damages. Where the giving of an erroneous instruction was harmless, the appellate court will affirm. Skinner v. R.J. Griffin & Co., 313 Ark. 430, 855 S.W.2d 913 (1993). No prejudice was shown, therefore, the giving of the incidental damage instruction was harmless error. Affirmed. NEWBERN, GLAZE and BROWN, JJ., dissent.