Court of Appeals hears challenge to excluded damages and apportionment instruction in Holmes v. Smith

The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in Holmes v. Smith on whether the trial court denied appellant Emily Holmes a fair trial by (1) failing to give a jury instruction explaining apportionment and the defense's burden when preexisting conditions are at issue and (2) excluding evidence of certain economic damages, including a sit‑stand desk described in the record as a VariDesk.

Attorney Lauren Peck, representing Holmes, told the court that Smith’s defense repeatedly emphasized preexisting degenerative conditions and that the jury should have been instructed on how to apportion damages and who bore the burden of proof. "Emily Holmes did not get a fair trial on damages," Peck said, arguing the trial court’s rulings left the jury without guidance on an affirmative defense the defense pursued throughout trial.

Peck also pressed the court to reverse the exclusion of testimony and evidence about the VariDesk, saying the desk’s projected service life and need were intertwined with work‑life expectancy and…