Pierce v. Casano

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Pierce v. Casano

625 A.2d 221, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 145, 1993 WL 191131

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMay 20, 1993

DocketNo. 92-377-Appeal

StatusPublished

This text of 625 A.2d 221 (Pierce v. Casano) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pierce v. Casano, 625 A.2d 221, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 145, 1993 WL 191131 (R.I. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This case came before a hearing panel of this court for oral argument on May 18, 1993 pursuant to an order directing both parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided.

In this case, the plaintiff had brought suit against the defendants for personal injury resulting from a motor vehicle accident. The case was tried before a jury in the Superior Court, and a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendants.

After reviewing the memoranda filed by the parties and after hearing the arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown.

We are of the opinion that 1) the trial judge’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence do not require reversal either individually or cumulatively; 2) the trial judge properly charged the jury with the applicable law (State v. D’Alo, 435 A.2d 317 (R.I.1981), holding that a trial judge may charge the jury in his or her own words as long as the applicable law is stated); and 3) the exclusion of certain medical affidavits was not error in light of this court’s holding in Cuddy v. Schiavonne, 568 A.2d 1387 (R.I.1990).

For these reasons, the plaintiff’s appeal is denied and dismissed. The trial judge’s [222]*222order denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial is sustained.

FAY, C.J., did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

This case came before a hearing panel of this court for oral argument on May 18, 1993 pursuant to an order directing both parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not be summarily decided.

In this case, the plaintiff had brought suit against the defendants for personal injury resulting from a motor vehicle accident. The case was tried before a jury in the Superior Court, and a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendants.

After reviewing the memoranda filed by the parties and after hearing the arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown.

We are of the opinion that 1) the trial judge’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence do not require reversal either individually or cumulatively; 2) the trial judge properly charged the jury with the applicable law (State v. D’Alo, 435 A.2d 317 (R.I.1981), holding that a trial judge may charge the jury in his or her own words as long as the applicable law is stated); and 3) the exclusion of certain medical affidavits was not error in light of this court’s holding in Cuddy v. Schiavonne, 568 A.2d 1387 (R.I.1990).

For these reasons, the plaintiff’s appeal is denied and dismissed. The trial judge’s [222]*222order denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial is sustained.

FAY, C.J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

625 A.2d 221, 1993 R.I. LEXIS 145, 1993 WL 191131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-casano-ri-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack