Problem
After a motor vehicle accident, the plaintiff contended that the highway was slippery on the bridge where the auto accident occurred. She testified that the other driver was going too fast for the slippery conditions. The defendant driver of the other auto denied that the bridge was slippery and claimed that the accident happened when he had to veer his car to escape a pothole. The plaintiff denied that there were potholes on the bridge. Defendant admitted that it had been raining at some point prior to the accident. The judge, being familiar with the bridge, took judicial notice that its surface always gets slippery when there is rain, and that there are no potholes on it. The plaintiff won the case, and the defendant appealed on the basis that it was legal error for the court to take judicial notice of disputed facts. What will the appellate court decide?
A. It is proper for the court to take judicial notice of something that it knows from personal experience to be true.
B. The court has wide discretion in deciding what is appropriate for judicial notice, and the judge's decision will not be disturbed on appeal.
C. It was reversible legal error for the court to take judicial notice of disputed facts on the basis of the judge's personal beliefs regarding the issue.
D. The court could take judicial notice of any fact that was not critical to the decision of the jury, and the condition of the bridge surface was irrelevant to issues of negligence.