Neider v. Spoehr

Plaintiff’s counsel states, “The basic issues are whether a negligence comparison of 75-25 against plaintiff is sustained by the evidence and law applicable and whether a new trial should not be had by reason of specific errors claimed by plaintiff, each of which would would have a bearing upon jury comparison of negligence.”

From this statement and the contentions of the plaintiff, the issues may be stated as follows:(1) Was the trial court’s refusal to permit plaintiff’s counsel cross-examination of Zimbric, a defendant in a consolidated action, and his passenger prejudicial error?(2) Was…