Legal Opinion

Payne v. Knutson

Montana Supreme Court

Decided September 28, 2004No. 03-784PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Leaphart

¶ 1 Darlene Payne appeals from denials of her motions for a new trial and to amend the judgment. We affirm.

¶2 We restate the issues on appeal as:

¶3 Whether the District Court erred in instructing the jury that it need not apportion percentages of negligence to the Knutsons.

¶4 Whether the District Court improperly admitted evidence that painted the Knutsons in a sympathetic light.

¶5 Whether there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict.

¶6 Whether Payne preserved the issue of “sudden emergency” for appeal.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶7 This action arises out of the tragic…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kiely Construction, L.L.C. v. City of Red Lodge Ex Rel. Red Lodge City CouncilMontana Supreme Court · 2002
  2. In re A.N.Montana Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Simonson v. WhiteMontana Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Drilcon, Inc. v. Roil Energy Corp., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Christofferson v. City of Great FallsMontana Supreme Court · 2003

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. DittonMontana Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Rohrer v. KnudsonMontana Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Dimarzio v. Crazy Mountain Construction, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Howard v. St. James Community HospitalMontana Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Upky v. Marshall Mountain, LLCMontana Supreme Court · 2008

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API