Pralle v. Milwicz

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed a judgment for Jessica Milwicz in a personal-injury action arising from a rear-end collision. The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that Milwicz’s negligence was not a substantial factor in causing Justin Pralle’s injuries, and that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in ruling on juror challenges or expert testimony. The court also declined to address a claimed jury-instruction error because the record showed that the instruction had been given.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that defendant's negligence was not the cause of plaintiff's injuries.
2. The superior court did not abuse its discretion in denying the challenges for cause, because the jurors provided good faith statements that they could set aside their biases and be fair.
3. The superior court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings on expert testimony.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the jury verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
2. Whether the superior court abused its discretion in denying challenges for cause of two jurors.
3. Whether the superior court abused its discretion in restricting the expert testimony of Dr. Lucas and admitting the expert testimony of Dr. Ballard.

Disposition

affirmed