Fantozzi v. Sandusky Cement Products Co.

The two issues before this court are whether the trial court committed reversible error when it ordered the parties, when they had objected, to participate in a videotape trial, and whether the trial court committed prejudicial error when it provided the jury with a separate interrogatory concerning damages for past and future “loss of life’s enjoyment.” For *605the reasons that follow, we answer the first query in the affirmative and the latter in the negative.

I

Videotape Trials

Sandusky Cement’s sole proposition of law, it asserts that a court order to conduct a videotape trial over the…