Thota v. Young

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “even assuming the new and independent cause instruction in this charge constituted error, it does not raise a Casteel issue”
• holding that once jury found Dr. Thota not negligent, any answer to the subsequent contributory negligence question could not alter the verdict
• holding that error in submitting a contributory negligence question was harmless given the jury’s other findings
• holding that the trial court’s inclusion of a question on the plaintiff’s contributory negligence was harmless because the jury answered “no” regarding the defendant’s negligence
• holding that the trial court's submission of the new and independent cause instruction was harmless error because conflicting expert testimony could have prompted a reasonable jury not to find the defendant negligent, regardless of its conclusion on the question of proximate cause
• stating that to preserve charge error complaining party must make the trial court aware of his complaint, timely and plainly, and obtain a ruling

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).