Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
23. Is the appellate court likely to rule on the merits of the nurse's appeal?
The nurse filed a timely notice of appeal, arguing that the judge's proximate cause instruction was erroneous and prejudicial.
After the parties made their final arguments to the jury, the court instructed the jury on proximate cause. The court's instructions regarding proximate cause were modified from the instruction that the court had previously proposed to the parties. The nurse promptly objected to the judge's proximate cause instruction. Thereafter, the jury returned a verdict for the medical company and the trial court entered judgment for the medical company.
A nurse sued a medical company in federal court in State A, asserting that a drug manufactured by the medical company was the proximate cause of her injuries. The nurse furnished the medical company with a written request of the jury instruction on proximate cause that the nurse wanted the court to give. The court informed the parties that it would not give the nurse's requested instruction and told the parties the essence of the instruction on proximate cause the court proposed to give. The court then gave the parties an opportunity to object on the record and out of the jury's presence. The nurse objected to the court's refusal to give the nurse's proposed instruction and stated the grounds for her objection, but did not separately object to the court's proposed instruction.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. As stated above, the nurse's objection was NOT untimely because she objected promptly once she learned of the new version of the instruction that the judge intended to give to the jury. Moreover, even if the nurse's objection had been untimely in this case, the appeals court would be required to review the instruction under the «plain error» standard of review, not the «clearly erroneous» standard, because the error would have affected the nurse's substantial rights.
B is incorrect. Again, the nurse's objection was not untimely and made promptly after the nurse learned of the instructions the judge gave to the jury. Therefore, the appeals court should rule on whether this was an error at the trial court.
C is incorrect. The nurse's failure to timely object to the court's proposed proximate cause instruction before trial has no bearing on whether the nurse's objection to the different jury instruction was timely.