## Facts

- Dennis Taylor drove a car in which his wife, Kathleen (“Kathy”) Taylor, was a passenger when it collided with a train at a railroad crossing.
- The train was owned by Southern Pacific Transportation Company and operated by Wilbur L. Biggerstaff.
- Kathy Taylor died from injuries sustained in the collision; the couple had been married about two months.
- Taylor sued Southern Pacific and Biggerstaff for wrongful death based on alleged negligence.
- Before trial, Taylor remarried and moved in limine to exclude any reference to the remarriage; the trial court granted the motion.
- During cross-examination, defense counsel asked questions implying remarriage (including how many times Taylor had been married and whether he had “gone without homemaking services” since the death).

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court properly excluded evidence of Taylor’s remarriage in a wrongful-death damages case.
2. Whether defense counsel’s questioning in violation of the in-limine order constituted misconduct.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by granting a new trial on all issues and as to both defendants based on attorney misconduct and an allegedly inadequate verdict resulting from passion or prejudice.
4. Whether the trial court properly assessed costs against Southern Pacific.
5. Whether the trial court erred by declining to impose sanctions on defense counsel for the in-limine violation.

## Decision

- The Arizona Supreme Court approved exclusion of remarriage evidence as irrelevant to mitigation of wrongful-death damages.
- The court found defense counsel’s disregard of the in-limine ruling constituted misconduct.
- The court held the trial court abused its discretion by ordering a complete new trial against Southern Pacific on all issues; relief was limited to the damages issue.
- The court held it was error to grant a new trial against Biggerstaff after the jury found him not liable; the judgment in his favor was reinstated.
- The court found no reversible error in the assessment of costs or in the refusal to impose additional sanctions on counsel.

## Legal Principles

- In a wrongful-death action, evidence that a surviving spouse remarried is generally inadmissible to reduce damages because it is collateral to the loss caused by the defendant and risks misleading the jury.
- Violating an order in limine may constitute attorney misconduct, but corrective relief depends on a showing that the misconduct likely affected the outcome.
- A new trial order must be limited to issues actually affected by error or prejudice; setting aside liability determinations is improper when the record supports the liability findings and the asserted prejudice concerns damages.

## Conclusion

The court held that remarriage evidence may not be used to mitigate wrongful-death damages and that, although defense counsel committed misconduct by violating an in-limine order, any new trial must be tailored to demonstrated prejudice; liability against Southern Pacific and nonliability of the engineer were left intact, with retrial limited to damages.


Taylor v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 130 Ariz. 516 (Ariz. 1981)