Brian S. Tincher v. Brian S. Davidson

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court held that a trial court erred by declaring a mistrial after a jury returned a general verdict accompanied by mathematically inconsistent comparative-fault calculation forms. The court concluded that the general verdict was not internally inconsistent or legally impossible and should not have been impeached by the calculation form. The case was remanded for entry of judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $150,000.

Holdings

1. A statutorily required comparative-fault calculation form is a procedural guide rather than a special verdict or jury interrogatory, and an otherwise internally consistent general verdict may not be impeached by a mathematically inconsistent calculation form.
2. The trial court erred in declaring a mistrial because the jury's $150,000 general verdict was not internally inconsistent, illogical, or impossible.
3. Indiana Code section 34-51-2-13 requires trial courts to inform the jury of qualifying inconsistencies, order further deliberations, and advise that the jury may change any portion of the verdict, but it does not supersede or limit other appropriate methods of assisting the jury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the comparative-fault calculation form could impeach or invalidate the jury's otherwise internally consistent general verdict.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by declaring a mistrial after the jury returned a general verdict accompanied by a mathematically inconsistent calculation form.
3. Whether Indiana Code section 34-51-2-13 limited the trial court to informing the jury of the inconsistency and ordering further deliberations.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded