Beverly S. v. Kayla R.

CURETON, A.J.,

dissenting.

Because I am firmly convinced Beverly properly preserved the issue of the failure of the trial court to charge loss of use, I am compelled to dissent.

At trial, counsel for Beverly inquired whether the trial court would “charge the loss of use provisions.” The court responded that it would charge Beverly could recover loss of use only if the jury found her car was economically repairable.1 The court’s actual charge follows:

*403If repairing the vehicle would put it in as good a condition as before the accident, then the measure of damages would be the cost of the repair…