Lemos v. Montez

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that rule 277 prohibits submitting \unavoidable accident\ to jury by separate question and that erroneous inferential rebuttal instruction effectively required plaintiff to prove nonexistence of affirmative defense, as under former, discredited law
• explaining that rule 277 prohibits submitting “unavoidable accident” to jury by separate question and that erroneous inferential rebuttal instruction effectively required plaintiff to prove nonexistence of affirmative defense, as under former, discredited law
• explaining that rule 277 prohibits submitting “unavoidable accident” to jury by separate question and that erroneous inferential rebuttal instruction effectively required plaintiff to prove nonexistence of affirmative defense, as under former, discredited law
• reversing based on jury instruction that “mere happening of a collision of motor vehicles is not evidence of negligence.”
• noting it is permissible to submit elements of negligence and proximate cause in a single issue
• disavowing the proliferation of jury instructions in favor of simplicity in jury charges

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).