Opinion
Editorial Note:
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Decided April 16, 1991.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, No. CV-85-6990-CBM; Consuelo B. Marshall, District Judge, Presiding.
C.D.Cal.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Before CHAMBERS, SCHROEDER and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3.
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff-appellant on liability but did not award him all of the damages to which he was entitled as a matter of law under the theory of strict liability he elected to pursue. The trial was marred by improper questioning on the part of defense counsel concerning matters with no relevance to this proceeding and which were inflammatory. The jury's award shows the plaintiff was prejudiced and a new trial on damages is required.
The judgment of the district court is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED for a new trial limited to the issue of damages.