Dunphy v. Walsh CA2/8
Appellants were plaintiffs in a personal injury action involving an automobile collision. The action went to jury trial and the jury found Respondent was not negligent. Appellants seek reversal of the judgment in favor of Respondent, arguing the trial court erred: 1) by granting Respondent’s motion in limine precluding argument, evidence, and instruction regarding the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur; 2) by refusing to instruct the jury regarding negligence per se on the theory that Respondent violated the duty imposed on drivers by Vehicle Code section 21703 to follow at a safe distance; and 3) by altering the wording of the jury instruction on alternative causation.
We disagree with Appellants’ contentions, and affirm the judgment entered by the trial court on April 25, 2017.
Comments on Dunphy v. Walsh CA2/8