Rittenour v. Gibson
Cindy Rittenour and
Donald Rittenour, Plaintiffs and Appellees
Orville Gibson, Defendant and Appellant
North Central Judicial District,
Judge Gary A. Holum
|Nature of Action:||Personal Injury|
|Term:||10/2002  Argument: 10/01/2002|
|ND cite:||2003 ND 14|
656 N.W.2d 691
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
A.Did the trial court err in admitting the testimony and evidence of future economic and noneconomic damages by Dr. Tyson Williams, DPM?
B.Did the trial court err in excluding photographs of damage to the interior of the mobile home caused by the tenant, Cheryl Lynn Jackson?
C.Did the trial court err in refusing to allow Wesley Borgen to testify as a character witness on behalf of Gibson?
D.Did the trial court err in the jury instructions on the Duty of Owner of Premises and on Unsafe Conditions of Premises?
E.Is the evidence of future economic and noneconomic damages sufficient to justify the verdict?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
A. The trial court did not err in admitting the testimony and other medical evidence presented by Dr. Tyson Williams regarding his examinations; diagnosis; treatment; future treatment; cost of future treatment; impairment; and past and future disability caused by Defendant's negligence.
B. The trial court did not err in excluding irrelevant and nonprobative photographs of uncleanly conditions and discarded items left in remote interior areas of the mobile home, depicting bedroom and bathroom areas not related to or involved in the accident, taken approximately seven or eight months following the accident and approximately two and one-half months after this lawsuit was commenced and after Defendant evicted his tenants and the renters vacated the mobile home.
C. The trial court did not err in refusing to allow Wesley Borgen to testify as a character witness for Defendant, as the court properly determined that the jury had heard sufficient testimony from both parties to enable them to judge and determine credibility so that no purpose would be served by allowing testimony of character witnesses for one or both parties and excluding general testimony relating to a parties character would not effect the outcome of the case or either parties right to a fair trial.
D. The court correctly instructed the jury on the duties of an owner of premises, unsafe conditions of premises, and the duties of both a landlord and a tenant.
E. The evidence of future economic and non economic damages was clearly sufficient to justify the jury's verdict.
|Add Docket 20020053 RSS|
|1||02/20/2002 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 02/19/2002|
|2||02/20/2002 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 02/19/2002|
|3||02/20/2002 Stipulation to omit portions of the transcript|
|4||02/28/2002 Copy of letter dated 2-27-02 from Laurel Marsh to Mr Klemin requesting advance payment for TRA|
|5||02/28/2002 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (Laurel Marsh): 04/10/2002|
|6||04/01/2002 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT (Laurel Marsh)|
|7||04/01/2002 ACTION BY TRIAL COURT (Judge Gary Holum). Granted: 05/20/2002|
|8||05/20/2002 TRANSCRIPT COMMENCING 11-13-00 (3 vols.)|
|9||05/21/2002 DISK - TRA (Nov. 13 through 21, 2000) (2 disks)|
|10||05/22/2002 RECORD ON APPEAL (2 vols.), Exhibits, Depositions (6) and Videos (4) (NOT REC'D: #68--Pl's Exh.17 -|
|11||05/22/2002 --Box of Material from the Floor)|
|12||06/28/2002 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|13||06/28/2002 DISK - ATB|
|14||06/28/2002 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|15||07/31/2002 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|16||07/31/2002 APPELLEE APPENDIX|
|17||08/05/2002 Original copy of AEB & signature page|
|18||08/05/2002 MOTION to extend page limitation (no motion)|
|19||08/05/2002 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (Sua Sponte). Granted|
|20||08/09/2002 DISK - AEB|
|21||08/13/2002 Corrected Table of Contents and page numbers of the appendix|
|22||08/15/2002 REPLY BRIEF of APPELLANT, with attached Addendum|
|23||08/15/2002 DISK - ryb|
|24||09/16/2002 Faxed letter from Lee Balerud dated 9-16-02 (RE: case continued to Oct. Term)|
|25||09/23/2002 MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF ORAL ARGUMENT & AFFIDAVIT|
|26||09/23/2002 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Oral argument continued to October). Granted|
|27||10/01/2002 APPEARANCES: Lawrence R. Klemin; Lee J. Balerud|
|28||10/01/2002 ARGUED: Klemin; Balerud (Vol. Y; Page 33)|
|29||10/01/2002 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|30||02/19/2003 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|31||02/19/2003 SPLIT OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V.|
|32||02/19/2003 Dissent: Maring, Mary Muehlen: DISSENT|
|33||02/19/2003 Join Dissent: Neumann, William A.: JN/DIS|
|34||02/19/2003 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellant|
|35||02/20/2003 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|37||03/19/2003 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|38||07/09/2008 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|