· 6/23/2020

Audibert v. Halle

Syllabus

The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendant for negligence in connection with personal injuries she sustained in a motor vehicle accident in which her vehicle was struck by the defendant's vehicle. Following a trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, claiming that the defendant's counsel had violated rule 3.4 (5) of the Rules of Professional Conduct during closing argument by alluding to matters that were not relevant or supported by the evidence, asserting personal knowledge of the facts, stating his personal opinion as to the plaintiff's credibility and improperly appealing to the emotions and passions of the jurors by attacking the plaintiff's character. The trial court denied the plaintiff's motion and rendered judgment in accordance with the verdict, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Held: 1. This court declined to review the plaintiff's claim, raised for the first time on appeal, that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of a subsequent motor vehicle accident in which the plaintiff was involved because the evidence was not relevant, the plaintiff having failed to adequately preserve this claim for appellate review, as her counsel failed to specify the basis of his objections to any of the questions by the defendant's counsel regarding the subsequent accident. 2. The plaintiff's claim that the trial court improperly failed to provide a curative instruction to the jury, as she had requested, in response to certain improper remarks by the defendant's counsel during closing argument was unavailing; that court properly exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's request for a curative instruction, as the court's numerous instructions to the jury were sufficient to inform the jury of its responsibilities and the duties of counsel. 3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion to

Judges: Keller; Bright; Bishop

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.