Giroux v. Gagne

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld the denial of nonsuit and directed-verdict motions in a motor-vehicle collision case, finding sufficient evidence for the jury to determine whether Gagne's failure to take evasive action constituted causal negligence. The court also upheld the admission of testimony concerning the speed and identity of Gagne's vehicle before the collision and affirmed limiting retrial to damages after the damages verdicts were set aside.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that Gagne's failure to pull farther and sooner to the right, and his failure to brake or sound his horn, constituted causal negligence; therefore, denial of the motions for nonsuit and directed verdict was proper.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting Fortier's testimony about the green Oldsmobile's speed and conduct before the collision.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting Lemay's testimony, even though his identification of the green car was indefinite and uncertain.
4. The trial court properly exercised its discretion by limiting retrial to damages because the liability and damages issues were separable and no error requiring retrial on liability was shown.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence supported denial of Gagne's motions for nonsuit and directed verdict on liability.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Fortier's testimony concerning the speed and conduct of a green Oldsmobile observed before the collision.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting Lemay's uncertain identification and speed testimony concerning a green car observed before the collision.
4. Whether the trial court properly limited retrial to damages after setting aside the damages verdicts rather than ordering a new trial on liability.

Disposition

other