Crews v. Mahaffey
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-00856-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CP-00856-SCT ; 2006-CP-00856-COA ; 2006-CT-00856-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-11-2007 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Motion for additur - Motion for new trial - Peremptory instruction Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-18-2006 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: DEFENDANT FOUND LIABLE AND PLAINTIFF AWARDED $5,000 IN DAMAGES Case Number: 251-00-1097-CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | GERALDINE CREWS |
GERALDINE CREWS (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | LISA MAHAFFEY | PATRICK M. TATUM |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Motion for additur - Motion for new trial - Peremptory instruction |
| Summary of the Facts: | Geraldine Crews filed an action to recover damages for personal injuries that she alleges to have sustained when she was rear-ended by Lisa Mahaffey. A jury found Mahaffey liable and awarded Crews $5,000 in damages. Crews appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Motion for additur Crews argues that the judge erred in refusing to grant an additur to supplement the jury’s finding on damages. An additur will only be granted in cases where the trial judge makes a finding that the damage award was inadequate because the jury was influenced by bias, prejudice or passion, or that the damages awarded were contrary to the overwhelming weight of credible evidence. This is a classic case of the battle of the experts, as Crews’s experts contend that her complaints relate to, or were aggravated by, the first accident, while Mahaffey’s expert contends that Crews’s problems relate to her degenerative disc disease. Although Mahaffey’s expert differs with Crews’s experts as to the cause of Crews’s problems for which she is seeking damages, apparently the jury found Crews’s experts at least somewhat credible, as they awarded her $5,000. There is nothing in the record which suggests that the jury was influenced by prejudice, bias, or passion. Furthermore, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion, as there was sufficient evidence from which the jury and the trial judge could have found that Crews was only entitled to $5,000 in damages. Issue 2: Motion for new trial Crews argues that the damages awarded by the jury were inadequate, as she has incurred $41,941.27 in medical bills. The jury’s award is not improper simply because the jury did not believe that Crews sustained over $40,000 in damages as a result of her accident with Mahaffey. The jury considered expert testimony from both sides prior to rendering its decision. Crews also argues that the court erred in refusing to give a peremptory instruction. Mahaffey admitted hitting Crews from behind while Crews was lawfully stopped. Clearly, Mahaffey was guilty of failing to maintain a proper lookout, and was therefore negligent. Consequently, it appears that there was an evidentiary basis for granting Crews’s peremptory instruction on the issue of liability. Even though the trial court erroneously failed to grant the instruction, the error is harmless because the jury returned a verdict in favor of Crews. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
