Mayes v. Bryan Part II
Defendants who initially agreed to jury instruction, then objected to it during deliberations, could not under doctrine of invited error object on appeal. Where defense in medical malpractice action based on alleged misdiagnosis contended that defendant physician did not cause harm to plaintiff because correct diagnosis would not have altered subsequent course of treatment, trial court did not err and did not prejudice defendant by instructing on "substantial factor" rather than "but for" test of causation. In calculating noneconomic damages, trial court correctly reduced noneconomic verdict to the statutory MICRA maximum of $250,000 and then reduced it further under Proposition 51 to reflect the percentage of fault attributed to settlement plaintiffs received. Where resulting amount was less than plaintiffs' statutory offer of settlement, they could not recover additional costs under Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 998.
Comments on Mayes v. Bryan Part II