Court Opinion

ID: 9518529
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:55:19.730193+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:29:29.278934
License: Public Domain

SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION ON REHEARING JUSTICE KASSERMAN delivered the opinion of the court: Having granted plaintiff’s petition for rehearing, we have reconsidered this cause without oral argument. In her petition for rehearing, plaintiff urges that the defense of comparative negligence rests “part and parcel” within the issue of damages, so as to be included in the new trial on damages. Defendants, on the other hand, contend that under this court’s original opinion the trial court is not to allow any proceedings on the defense of comparative negligence. We agree with defendants.  Upon retrial as to damages the issue should be limited solely to the amount of plaintiff’s damages, with the itemization of the verdict to be made by the jury as directed in our original opinion. The finding of the original jury as to the amount of plaintiff’s comparative negligence should then be applied to the new finding as to the amount of plaintiff’s damages. We reject plaintiff’s contention that the amount of plaintiff’s comparative negligence is intertwined with the amount of the damages so as to prevent a retrial as to damages without also a retrial as to the percent of plaintiff’s comparative negligence. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the circuit court of Williamson County is reversed and this cause is remanded for a new trial consistent with this opinion. Reversed and remanded. JONES and KARNS, JJ., concur.