on the grounds for new trial alleged in the motion and ruled upon by the district court. Weyerhaeuser v. Thermogas, 620 N.W.2d 819, 823 (Iowa 2000). When the motion and the ruling are based on a claim that the district court erred on issues of law, our review stands or falls on the correctness of the court’s ruling on the legal question. Id. Here, the motion for new trial and the issues raised on appeal involve challenges to the correctness of the district court’s ruling on legal questions. We review jury instructions for correction of errors at law. Iowa Comprehensive Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Fund Bd. v. Shell Oil Co., 606 N.W.2d 370, 373 (Iowa 2000). Error in giving a jury instruction does not merit reversal unless the complaining party ha , 38, 31 N.E.2d 450, 452 (1940) (<HOLDING>); McCormick v. Allegheny County, 263 Pa. 146,
holding that sidewalk is simply a part of the street set apart for pedestrians holding that in common parlance a sidewalk is the part of the street assigned to the use of pedestrians holding that sidewalk is that portion of the street usually devoted to pedestrian travel but is nevertheless a part of the street holding that sidewalk is that part of a street that has been set aside for use by pedestrians holding sidewalk is a part of the street that town authorities have set aside for pedestrian use