David Giambra and Alexandria Giambra Husband and Wife on Behalf of Their Minor Child, Zadkeil Giambra, Plaintiffs…

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the judgment because the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript sufficient to permit review of the evidentiary challenges to the damages verdict and jury submission. The court held that negligence per se does not, absent an express statutory exception, preclude contributory negligence or comparative apportionment. The court also clarified that sufficiency of the evidence on a Rule 59 new-trial motion is reviewed de novo, while jury instructions and special-verdict forms are reviewed for abuse of discretion.