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.
3. What argument has the best chance of persuading the court to grant the motion?
The worker has moved for a new trial on the ground that the court's negligence instruction was improper.
A worker was injured when a machine he was using on the job malfunctioned. The worker brought a federal diversity action against both the machine's manufacturer and the company responsible for the machine's maintenance. At trial, the worker submitted a proposed jury instruction on negligence. The court did not accept the proposed instruction and instead gave a negligence instruction that the worker's attorney believed was less favorable and legally incorrect. The attorney did not object to the negligence instruction before it was given. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants.
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
In order to raise the inadequacy of instructions on appeal, a party who wishes to make an objection to the instructions must do so before the jury retires or, in the event that «a party was not informed of an instruction or action on a request before that opportunity to object, and the party objects promptly after learning that the instruction or request will be, or has been, given or refused.» FRCP 51(c)(2)(B).
«Plain error» is an error found by an appellate court that affects the substantial rights of the parties. Under FRCP 51(d), a court may consider a plain error in the instructions when the claim was not preserved by proper objection if the error affects substantial rights.
On appeal, when it is alleged that the trial judge erred on a pure matter of law, the appellate court may substitute its judgment for that of the trial judge. This is called de novo review. A pure matter of law may be whether a statute applies at all or the meaning of the language of the statute.
C is correct. This will be the most effective argument for granting a new trial because it accounts for the attorney's failure to preserve the issue. At the close of evidence, or sooner if allowed by the court, parties may submit proposed jury instructions. The court must inform the parties of its proposed instructions and give the parties a chance to object before instructing the jury. A party must object to an instruction or failure to give an instruction before the jury retires for deliberation. Failure to properly preserve an objection by this time will waive the issue on appeal. However, a court may consider a plain error in the instructions when the error was not preserved by a timely objection if that error affects the party's substantial rights. In this case, since the attorney did not object to the negligence instruction, the best argument for a new trial is that the instruction was a plain error that affects the worker's substantial rights.
A is incorrect. This would not be the most effective argument because, regardless of whether the worker's claim was a pure matter of law or a mixed question of law and fact, when it is not properly preserved, FRCP 51(d) requires that it affects substantial rights to be reviewed by the appellate court.
B is incorrect. Under FRCP 51(c), a party who wishes to object to a jury instruction or the failure to give an instruction must do so on the record, stating distinctly the matter objected to, and the grounds for the objection. In this case, the worker's objection was not preserved when he merely submitted his proposed negligence instruction because he did not properly object on the record.
D is incorrect. This is an incorrect statement of the law. The need for a formal objection to a judicial ruling in order to preserve an argument has in no way been eliminated by the FRCP. As explained above, the FRCP states that a party must object to a jury instruction on the record and express the nature of the objection.