Alexander v. Rent-A-Fence
Plaintiff and appellant Clive Alexander sued respondents Rent-A-Fence, Ltd., and Mariano Francisco Martinez (collectively, defendant) for negligence after Martinez, driving a truck owned by Rent-A-Fence, hit plaintiff's car. Plaintiff contended that as a result of the collision, he suffered debilitating disc injuries and chronic pain, incurred substantial medical expenses, and cannot return to work. The jury returned a modest verdict for plaintiff, awarding him $48,800 for past and future medical expenses, lost earnings, and noneconomic damages, but nothing for future medical expenses, lost earnings, and noneconomic damages.
Plaintiff moved for a new trial based on juror misconduct, asserting that during deliberations jurors improperly considered information from outside sources, including their own medical conditions and the effect of a plaintiff's verdict on their automobile insurance rates. The trial court found that jurors had engaged in misconduct, but because it concluded that the misconduct was not prejudicial, it denied plaintiff's new trial motion.
Court conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that the jurors engaged in misconduct. Based on our review of the whole record, however, we conclude that the misconduct was prejudicial. Accordingly, Court reverse for a new trial.
Comments on Alexander v. Rent-A-Fence