Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Abuse of Discretion – Jury Instructions

By: Derek Hawkins//January 20, 2022//

Abuse of Discretion – Jury Instructions

By: Derek Hawkins//January 20, 2022//

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District IV

Case Name: Mark B. Pattinson, et al., v. Richard H. Ubersox, et al.,

Case No.: 2019AP1866

Officials: Blanchard, P.J., Kloppenburg, and Nashold, JJ.

Focus: Abuse of Discretion – Jury Instructions

Mark B. Pattinson appeals a final judgment, entered on a jury verdict, dismissing his personal injury suit against Richard H. Ubersox. At trial, each party argued that the other was negligent in causing a vehicular accident, with Ubersox presenting evidence that Pattinson’s driving reaction time was delayed because of alcohol impairment. On appeal, Pattinson argues that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion by: (1) giving a jury instruction setting forth the presumptive effect of chemical tests for intoxication resulting from alcohol consumption; (2) admitting the testimony of Ubersox’s toxicologist expert witness, who relied on the results of Ubersox’s hospital blood test; and (3) prohibiting Pattinson from claiming future medical expenses. We affirm, concluding that Pattinson has not demonstrated error in connection with the jury instruction and that he has forfeited his challenge to the admissibility of Ubersox’s expert witness testimony. Because we uphold the judgment dismissing all claims against Ubersox, we do not reach Pattinson’s argument regarding medical expenses.

Full Text


Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests