State Farm v. Davis
| Docket Number: | 2003-CA-01057-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-16-2004 Opinion Author: Bridges, P.J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Negligence per se - Maintaining a proper lookout - Section 63-3-707 - Yielding right-of-way - Section 63-3-803 Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, P.J., Myers, Chandler, Griffis and Ishee, JJ. Dissenting Author : Irving, J. Dissent Joined By : King, C.J. and Barnes, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-14-2003 Appealed from: Claiborne County Circuit Court Judge: Lamar Pickard Disposition: JURY VERDICT FOR DEFENDANT Case Number: 2001-183 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | State Farm Auto Insurance Company, as Subrogee of Sheila Barnes and Sheila Barnes, Individually |
JAMES "PAUL" CLINTON |
||
| Appellee: | Dora Davis | MICHAEL EARL KEYTON |
|
|
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 - Negligence per se - Maintaining a proper lookout - Section 63-3-707 - Yielding right-of-way - Section 63-3-803 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Sheila Barnes and Dora Davis were involved in an accident. Barnes and State Farm Insurance Companies, as subrogee of Barnes, its insured, filed an action against Davis seeking indemnification for damages paid as a result of Davis’s alleged negligence. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Davis. State Farm and Barnes appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The jury is to determine the issue of negligence, unless the doing of the act which caused the injury complained of is not in dispute or conclusively appears from the evidence, and no inference except that of negligence or of no negligence can be justly drawn therefrom, in which event the question is for the determination of the trial judge. The record shows that there was no issue of fact and conclusively establishes that Davis was negligent; therefore, the trial judge should have decided the case. The specific statutory duties with which Davis was required to comply include maintaining a proper lookout, as codified in section 63-3-707, and yielding the right-of-way, as codified in section 63-3-803. These duties are implicated when a motorist crosses a lane of opposite flowing traffic. Davis was crossing Barnes’s lane of traffic, so Barnes falls in that class of protected persons. The duties were designed to facilitate safe passage across opposing lanes, thereby avoiding collisions. Barnes was injured when she collided with Davis, so Barnes certainly suffered the particular injury the statute was designed to prevent. As a result, Davis was per se negligent. Accordingly, a verdict should have been returned in favor of Barnes because the violation of the statute by Davis was the unequivocal proximate cause of Barnes’s injury. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
