Kendrick v. Pippin
Colorado Supreme Court
252 P.3d 1052 (2011)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Holly Pippin (defendant) was driving when she hit Cheryl Kendrick (plaintiff). Kendrick was injured and sued Pippin for negligent driving. The jury found that Pippin was not negligent. Kendrick hired a jury consultant to interview the jurors. The jury consultant learned that the jury’s foreperson was an engineer. The engineer juror performed her own calculations using the trial information to evaluate Pippin’s speed and reaction time. The calculation results made the engineer believe that Pippin did not have time to react and, therefore, was not negligent. The engineer shared these calculations with the other jurors, and at least one other juror said that the calculations were helpful. Kendrick used the jury consultant’s testimony to ask the court for a new trial based on possible jury misconduct. Kendrick argued that the jury had been improperly exposed to extraneous prejudicial information in the form of the engineer’s calculations. The district court denied the motion. Kendrick appealed, and the appellate court affirmed the district court. Kendrick then appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bender, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
