data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dd640/dd6405f6057656d2a258e3a66861b73f09369a34" alt="logo"
Driver insurance lawsuit 387
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c35dc/c35dc65658e4a0dda9291d6656abc3c7bcfa5efe" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af2bb/af2bb3d98f4a270c9d5f8d1c77d45dcd5fc6b07a" alt=""
Premises Liability is another area of San Diego Personal Injury Law
Bell v Bayersiche Motoren Werken AG 181 Cal.App.4th 1108 (2010) (2/3) Court instructed jury twice to disregard insurance, and one isolated question (Did witness check w/drivers whether they had insurance?) during several-week trial immediately followed by another “disregardinsurance” instruction, but nevertheless granted new trial based on the question. [1] Trial court could not reasonably believe one isolated mention of insurance was prejudicial, and granting new trial is error. [2] Juror’s affidavits showing jurors misunderstood, and one misstated, jury instructions, are inadmissible evidence of thought processes. [3] Consumer expectations test is thatof ordinary consumer. Testimony by Def’s engineers (rollover risk is not apparent) does not compel finding of failure to meet test. [4] CACI 1204 properly modified to include automobile aesthetics as a factor in balancing design risks. San Diego personal injury attorney.