Skip to main content
· 2/9/1993

Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

Citations

  • 861 P.2d 668
  • 176 Ariz. 383
  • 132 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 44
  • 1993 Ariz. App. LEXIS 25

How courts have described this case

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

  • addressing constitutionality of erroneous instruction under Article 18, § 5 even though jury returned general verdict for the defense and could have found for prevailing party on basis not affected by the error
  • permissive instructions “leave the plaintiff’s recovery to the discretion of the jury.”
  • “Whe[n] an erroneous instruction has been given on the law, and a correct instruction might have produced a different result, the error is not cured by the fact that the jury might have found for the prevailing party on some basis unaffected by the error.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Druke, Hathaway, Espinosa

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.