Westra v. Bennick

Appellant-husband contends that because the verdict of the jury was in excess of the amount of damage to his *262truck, the jury intended to compensate him for the injury to his wife as well as the damage to his vehicle. He argues that the verdict is, therefore, inconsistent because the jury did not return a verdict for his appellant-wife.

I concur in the result reached by the Majority that the judgment of the lower court be affirmed because the jury’s verdict was not inconsistent.

Appellant-wife was involved in a car accident with appellee. She and her husband sued to recover their damages…