Chapman v. Williams
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01057-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-02-2003 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Malicious prosecution - Weight of evidence - Admission of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - Jury instruction Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-17-2002 Appealed from: Clarke County Circuit Court Judge: Robert Bailey Disposition: ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT RECOVER $10,000, PLUS INTEREST AT A RATE OF 8% UNTIL PAID, TOGETHER WITH ALL COURT COSTS Case Number: 2000-106-B |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | GLENN CHAPMAN |
JOHN E. HOWELL |
||
| Appellee: | TRAPP WILLIAMS | GEORGE C. WILLIAMS |
|
|
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: | Malicious prosecution - Weight of evidence - Admission of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - Jury instruction |
| Summary of the Facts: | Glenn Chapman filed a complaint against Trapp Williams alleging that Williams had shot him. Also, Chapman swore out a criminal affidavit against Williams, charging him with aggravated assault. The case was presented to a grand jury which declined to indict Williams. Williams filed a counter-claim against Chapman for slander and malicious prosecution. The jury returned a verdict for Williams on his counter-claim in the amount of $10,000, and Chapman appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Weight of evidence Chapman argues that the verdict is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence, because the jury ignored the evidence and the proof as well as the instructions of the court. Whether the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence is a matter which the trial judge must decide first. Since Chapman failed to move for a new trial, he is barred from raising this issue on appeal. Issue 2: Admission of videotape Chapman argues that the court erred in admitting a videotape made two years after the shooting, because no foundation was laid for admission of the entire videotape, the court failed to make a Rule 403 balancing analysis and although the videotape was admitted for impeachment purposes only, no such impeachment occurred. M.R.E. 901(b)(1) provides that authentication can be accomplished by testimony from someone familiar with and possessing knowledge of the contents of the document or recording. Since the witness who made the videotape was familiar with the scene and testified sufficiently to the accuracy of the recording, the authenticity of the videotape was proven. Once the authenticity of the videotape was established, the only remaining question was its relevance. Although Williams's counsel did not direct the witness to any specific thing on the videotape which contradicted his direct examination testimony, the jury heard the direct examination testimony of the witness and could decide for itself whether the videotape supported or contradicted his testimony. Therefore, the court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the videotape into evidence. Issue 3: Jury instruction Chapman argues that the court erred when it gave an instruction to the jury that it should award money damages to the prevailing party. Failure to make a contemporaneous objection constitutes a waiver of the argument on appeal. Here, Chapman’s attorney not only failed to object to the language of the instruction at trial, he affirmed that he had no objection to the instruction. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
