Appellate Court of Illinois

Judgment against defendants in a claim arising from a fatal vehicle accident is affirmed where: 1) third-party defendant undertook a duty to preserve evidence and as a result had a duty to exercise reasonable care to preserve it for any party that might need to use it; 2) the jury properly concluded that the third-party defendant breached its duty to exercise reasonable care in preserving the evidence; 3) the third-party defendant was not entitled to a judgment notwithstanding the verdict regarding the spoliation of evidence; 4) third-party defendant was not entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the issue of damages to third-party plaintiffs; 5) third-party defendant was not entitled to a new trial on the basis that the jury's verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence; 6) there was no improper jury instruction regarding the duty to preserve evidence requiring a new trial; 7) third-party defendant is not entitled to a new trial because the court did not err in directing a verdict for the third-party plaintiffs on the issue of sole proximate cause; 8) the court did not err in its jury instruction on damages for the third-party plaintiffs; 9) the court did not abuse its discretion in denying third-party plaintiff's motion for leave to amend their complaint to add a count and to request prejudgment interest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/04/2007
• Published 06/04/2007

Judges

Court

• Appellate Court of Illinois

Counsel