## Facts

- Parents of two minor decedents sued the driver, Clarence L. Tucker, for wrongful death; the cases were consolidated for trial.
- On the day of trial, Tucker filed amended answers expressly admitting liability for the deaths and admitting responsibility for damages proximately caused by the collision.
- Despite the admissions, the trial court allowed plaintiffs to present detailed evidence about the accident’s circumstances, including Tucker’s intoxication and the force of impact (bodies thrown a significant distance).
- Tucker objected that, with liability admitted, the only remaining issue was the amount of damages and the accident-circumstance evidence was irrelevant and immaterial.
- The jury returned verdicts awarding $7,500 to each set of parents, and judgment was entered on the verdicts.
- Tucker appealed, arguing the admission of accident-circumstance evidence was outside the issues framed by the pleadings and required reversal.

## Issues

1. Whether, after a defendant unequivocally admits liability and causal responsibility for damages in the pleadings, the plaintiff may introduce evidence of accident circumstances directed to fault (e.g., intoxication, violence of impact).
2. Whether admitting such evidence, if error, requires reversal of the judgments.

## Decision

- The court held the challenged evidence was improperly admitted because admissions in the answer removed liability-related facts from dispute, leaving only damages for determination.
- The court emphasized that pleadings limit issues and proof, and trial evidence must be confined to matters in controversy to avoid wasting time and confusing the jury.
- The court concluded the accident-circumstance evidence had no proper bearing on damages in these wrongful death actions (including because no punitive damages were at issue) and risked inflaming the jury.
- The court nevertheless affirmed the judgments, holding the error was non-prejudicial: the awards were not excessive and the record did not show the jury’s damages determination was driven by passion or prejudice.

## Legal Principles

- Facts not controverted by the answer are not in issue, and no evidence is required (or proper) to prove them at trial.
- One function of pleadings is to narrow issues; evidence must be relevant and material to the matters remaining for adjudication.
- After a defendant admits liability and causal responsibility, evidence offered primarily to establish fault is inadmissible unless it has independent relevance to a live issue (such as a valid damages theory).
- Evidentiary error does not require reversal absent a showing of prejudice; a judgment may be affirmed if the record indicates the verdict was not materially affected.

## Conclusion

When a defendant admits liability in the pleadings, trial proof should be limited to remaining disputed issues, typically the amount of damages; admission of fault-focused accident details is error unless independently relevant, but affirmance is proper if the error is harmless.


Fuentes v. Tucker, 31 Cal. 2d 1, 187 P.2d 752 (Cal. 1947)