Pexa v. Auto Owners Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “reasonable value of medical services can be shown by evidence of the amount paid for such services”
• holding “reasonable value of medical services can be shown by evidence of the amount paid for such services”
• concluding district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of the tortfeasor’s intoxication
• holding that evidence of other medical conditions that have and will impact the plaintiff’s physical and mental well-being and ability to enjoy life are clearly relevant to the plaintiff’s claim for damages for loss of use of body and for pain and suffering
• stating that in a special verdict, “the jury resolves pertinent factual issues pursuant to the court’s instructions, and the trial court enters the general verdict ‘by applying the applicable law to the jury’s factual determinations’ ” (citation omitted; emphasis added)
• stating that in a special verdict, “the jury resolves pertinent factual issues pursuant to the court’s instructions, and the trial court enters the general verdict ‘by applying the applicable law to the jury’s factual determinations’ ” (citation omitted; emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).