Fortune v. Gibson, No. 1634
| Court | Court of Appeals of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 403 S.E.2d 674,304 S.C. 279 |
| Parties | Kareem FORTUNE, a minor under the age of Fourteen (14) years, Respondent, v. Anthony B. GIBSON and Howard Trapp, Jr., of Whom Howard Trapp, Jr., is the Appellant. Darryl McGHANEY, Respondent, v. Anthony B. GIBSON and Howard Trapp, Jr., of Whom Howard Trapp, Jr., is the Appellant. Appeal of Howard TRAPP, Jr. (2 cases) . Heard |
| Docket Number | No. 1634 |
| Decision Date | 21 January 1991 |
Page 674
years, Respondent,
v.
Anthony B. GIBSON and Howard Trapp, Jr., of Whom Howard
Trapp, Jr., is the Appellant.
Darryl McGHANEY, Respondent,
v.
Anthony B. GIBSON and Howard Trapp, Jr., of Whom Howard
Trapp, Jr., is the Appellant.
Appeal of Howard TRAPP, Jr. (2 cases)
Decided April 1, 1991.
[304 S.C. 280] Thomas C. Cofield and R. Lewis Johnson of Barnes, Alford, Stork & Johnson, Columbia, for appellant.
Nelson B. Parker, Manning, William B. Woods of Brown & Woods, Columbia, and John E. Miles, Sumter, for respondents.
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from judgment in two negligence actions that were consolidated for trial. Kareem Fortune and Darryl McGhaney were passengers in a car driven by Anthony Gibson. Gibson's car collided with one driven by Howard Trapp, Jr., and Fortune and McGhaney sued Gibson and Trapp for injuries they suffered as a result of the accident. Gibson filed a cross-claim
Page 675
against Trapp for his damages. After the parties agreed to a bifurcated trial, the issue of liability was tried and a jury returned a verdict against Trapp in favor of Fortune, McGhaney, and Gibson. During the recess before the damages [304 S.C. 281] phase, one of the jurors was selected for another jury. The judge recessed until the full jury could be reassembled. During that recess, two additional jurors were seated on yet another jury. The judge then asked the parties if they would proceed in the damages phase with less than twelve jurors. Trapp refused. Thereafter, the judge sustained a motion, over Trapp's objection, to continue the damages phase until the next term of court. Trapp moved for a new trial absolute on the ground that he was entitled to have the same jury decide the damages issue as had decided the issue of liability. The motion was denied. The damages phase was tried at a later term of court with a different jury. The jury awarded Fortune, McGhaney, and Gibson damages against Trapp. Trapp appeals. We affirm.Trapp asserts two arguments on appeal: (1) the circuit court erred in continuing the damages phase to a successive term before a different jury; and (2) the court erred in submitting the case to the jury on interrogatories which did not include a specific interrogatory on Trapp's contributory negligence defense against Gibson's cross-claim.
I.
We note from the outset...
To continue reading
Request your trial
6 practice notes
-
Creighton v. Coligny Plaza Ltd., No. 2909.
...A trial should be bifurcated only if the issues are so distinct that trial of each alone would not result in injustice. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 403 S.E.2d 674 (Ct.App.1991). Where evidence relevant to the issues of both hability and damages overlap, bifurcation is inappropriate. 33......
-
Scdot v. First Carolina Corp. of S.C., No. 26275.
...interrogatory, the court must consider the question or interrogatory along with the instructions given to the jury. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 282, 403 S.E.2d 674, 675 (Ct.App.1991) (finding that special interrogatories and instructions must be considered together). The prejudicial ef......
-
Ligon v. Norris, No. 4170.
...as to necessitate reversal on this issue. Interrogatories must be considered in conjunction with the jury instructions. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 282, 403 S.E.2d 674, 675 (Ct.App.1991). During general charges to the jury, the trial court instructed that the verdict must be unanimous.......
-
Flagstar Corp. v. Royal Surplus Lines, No. 2866.
...trial by jury as declared by the Constitution or as given by a statute of the State. This court addressed Rule 42(b) in Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 403 S.E.2d 674 (Ct.App.1991). There the parties agreed to bifurcation of the liability and damages phases of the negligence trial, but exp......
Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
-
Creighton v. Coligny Plaza Ltd., No. 2909.
...A trial should be bifurcated only if the issues are so distinct that trial of each alone would not result in injustice. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 403 S.E.2d 674 (Ct.App.1991). Where evidence relevant to the issues of both hability and damages overlap, bifurcation is inappropriate. 33......
-
Scdot v. First Carolina Corp. of S.C., No. 26275.
...interrogatory, the court must consider the question or interrogatory along with the instructions given to the jury. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 282, 403 S.E.2d 674, 675 (Ct.App.1991) (finding that special interrogatories and instructions must be considered together). The prejudicial ef......
-
Ligon v. Norris, No. 4170.
...as to necessitate reversal on this issue. Interrogatories must be considered in conjunction with the jury instructions. Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 282, 403 S.E.2d 674, 675 (Ct.App.1991). During general charges to the jury, the trial court instructed that the verdict must be unanimous.......
-
Flagstar Corp. v. Royal Surplus Lines, No. 2866.
...trial by jury as declared by the Constitution or as given by a statute of the State. This court addressed Rule 42(b) in Fortune v. Gibson, 304 S.C. 279, 403 S.E.2d 674 (Ct.App.1991). There the parties agreed to bifurcation of the liability and damages phases of the negligence trial, but exp......
Request a trial to view additional results