Court Opinion

ID: 9687017
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:13:53.686938+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:50:59.847573
License: Public Domain

Levin, J.
(dissenting). While the jury, in awarding the plaintiff $1,344 in damages, resolved the liability issue in her favor, that decision may have been the product of compromise. Jurors who originally intended to vote for damages in a greater amount than $1,344 may have agreed to reduce the amount to $1,344 to obtain the votes of jurors who, because of the erroneous instruction, originally intended to vote for a no cause. We have no way of knowing that is what occurred, but neither can that be excluded.
It is not plaintiff’s burden to show that she was prejudiced by the instructional error; it is rather the defendant’s burden to show that the error in instruction did not affect the result. There being no basis for concluding that the error did not affect the result, plaintiff is entitled to a new trial.