Harewood v. Carter
In Harewood v. Carter, 63 Conn. App. 199, 202, 772 A.2d 764 (2001), the plaintiff sustained injuries as a result of a car accident with the defendant. The plaintiff thereafter commenced a negligence action against the defendant in two counts.
Count one alleged negligence, and count two alleged statutory violations that, if proved, could have entitled the plaintiff to double or treble damages. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on her negligence claim, but the court directed a verdict for the defendant on count two due to insufficient evidence.
On appeal, this court determined that the directed verdict was improper and a retrial was necessary. The scope of the retrial thus became a central issue in that case.
The Court recognized that the cases concerning an order limiting retrial to specific issues typically involve "one cause of action where the issue is whether the liability and damages issues are inextricably woven together so as to require a trial de novo of both issues and do not involve, as the present case does, two separate causes of action arising out of the same incident." Id., 204-205.
The Court concluded that "the jury already found the proper amount to award the plaintiff for her injuries. It remains for a jury to decide only whether there was a statutory violation and, if so, whether it should double or treble the award because of that statutory violation." Id., 207.