Negligence : Truck Accident – Consolidation – Verdict Form

(1)Where the plaintiffs injured in a truck accident argued that the district court erred when it instructed the jury to allocate negligence among the three parties involved on a single verdict form rather than using two separate statements of the case and two separate verdict forms, consolidation was necessary because the case involved one accident with three potential tortfeasors, so separate forms could have resulted in inconsistent verdicts, and the plaintiffs waived any objection when they failed to object.

(2)Where a plaintiff in a truck accident negligence case argued that the non-economic damage calculations were inadequate and inconsistent with economic damages, the plaintiff waived the argument by not requesting a new trial, and based on the medical evidence, the case did not warrant review of non-economic damages.

Judgment is affirmed.

Kozlov v. Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc. (MLW No. 68954/Case No. 15-1098 – 21 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8^th Circuit, Beam, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, Smith Camp, J. (George Hamilton Moyer Jr., Madison, Nebraska, and  James C. Bocott, North Platte, Nebraska, argued for appellants) (Ryan Edward Karaim, Kansas City, Missouri, argued for appellee; John G. Schultz. and Stephen G. Olson II appeared on the brief).

Read the full text of this opinion. (PDF)