Benjamin Wright, Jr. v. House of Imports, Inc.

Notable Items:

Issue(s) Before the Court:

Petitioner's Claim(s):

Respondent's Claim(s):

Holding(s) and Disposition:

Material Facts:

• Petitioner entered premises to purchased shoes.
• Having done so, he slipped and fell down stairs suffering serious injuries.
• Petitioner file a common-law negligence action alleging that the retailer negligently maintained its business premises in a dangerous and defective condition, causing him to fall and suffer personal injuries.
• Kentucky comparative negligence: 25% petitioner, 75% respondant.
• Expert testimony at trial regarding violations of building code safety standards.
• Trial court did not instruct jury regarding applicability of the building code.
• A full recounting of the facts is available below

Procedural History:

• District Court awarded Petitioner in his simple negligence action against Respondant.
• Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for new trial, holding that the trial court committed a palpable error in permitting expert testimony of building code violations without instructin jury.

Rationale

Majority Opinion

• Common-law negligence action. Not a negligence per se action.
• Therefore, building code violations were irrelevant.
• Trial court erred in permitting expert testimony regarding violations of the building code.
• However, not a "palpable" error in failing to instruct jury as to applicability of building code to instant case.
• Jury instructions were tendered by the respondant.
• Therefore, respondant cannot claim that its "substantial rights" have been affected by said instructions. (estoppel?)
• A full description of the rationale is available below

?? Concurrance in part, dissent in part (??)

?? Dissent (??)

Full Recounting of Facts

• A list of the material facts is available above

Majority Full Argument

• The core of the rationale is available above