Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P suffered a severe brain injury when the D ladder he was using to clean his gutters buckled and collapsed. P sued D alleging a defective design and negligence. There were no eyewitnesses to the incident. D informed P that it intended to use an exemplar of the actual ladder at trial. The exemplar was new but had been built to the exact specifications of the ladder D had been using. The exemplar ladder was marked as an exhibit 'for Demonstrative Purposes.' P objected to any use of the new exemplar ladder. Discovery had closed two years earlier, and the ladder had not been included in D's expert disclosures. D opined that the ladder was demonstrative to help the jury understand testimony and it was not substantive evidence. The court thus permitted the ladder to be displayed and used in the courtroom during trial testimony by D's expert. The ladder was used extensively at trial. The ladder was not sent to the jury for use in deliberations. During deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge asking to see the exemplar ladder. P objected in that it was demonstrative evidence. The district judge allowed the jurors to view the exemplar ladder in the court-room. No juror looked at the ladder. They did renew their request to see it in the jury room. After repeated requests, the judge allowed the ladder in the jury room with instructions about reconstructing the accident with that ladder. D got the verdict and P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co