Court Opinion

ID: 9568569
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:05:17.988387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:45:17.825476
License: Public Domain

Snead, C.J., and Carrico, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
We agree that the questions of negligence, contributory negligence and proximate cause were for the jury to decide. But we cannot agree that the issue of liability should be re-litigated. It is true that no verdict was rendered in Danny’s case, but that is not the question. It is not true, as the majority concludes, that the jury was required to return a verdict for Danny before they could reach a verdict' for the father. The instruction merely commanded a verdict for the father if one was rendered for Danny. Under the facts in these cases, the father could recover if, and only if, the railroad was liable to Danny. The critical question, therefore, is whether the railroad had been found liable to Danny. We believe it had.
Although the colloquy between the judge and jury foreman was unusual, it was had at the request of counsel and ought not to be ignored. Until the colloquy there was no way of knowing on what basis the jury found a verdict for the father. The colloquy, however, ehminated any questions and made it abundantly clear that the jury had found the railroad was liable to Danny. Hence, the father was entitled to recover for Danny’s medical expenses and judgment was properly entered on the reduced verdict in his favor.
Further, since these cases were tried together, all the parties were before the court, the issues of liability were identical, and the jury made it clear that they had determined the railroad was liable, we are of opinion that the railroad was thereafter precluded from denying its liability to Danny. The railroad has had its day in court and should not be permitted to re-litigate the issue of its liability. Hence, we think that the trial court properly limited the new trial in Danny’s case to the question of damages.
We would affirm the judgments of the trial court.