River Region Med. Corp. v. Patterson
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-02357-SCT Linked Case(s): 2005-CA-02357-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-29-2007 Opinion Author: Smith, C.J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wrongful death - Section 11-7-13 - Proof of individual claim Judge(s) Concurring: WALLER, P.J., CARLSON, DICKINSON, RANDOLPH AND LAMAR, JJ. Dissenting Author : Easley, J., Without Separate Written Opinion. Dissenting Author : Graves, J., With Separate Written Opinion. Dissent Joined By : Diaz, P.J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment; Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WRONGFUL DEATH |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-19-2005 Appealed from: WARREN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Isadore Patrick Disposition: The trial court granted partial summary judgment to River Region Medical Corporation (“River Region”) as to the claims of the deceased’s estate and Plaintiffs sought no other economic damages. The remaining claims at trial were the Plaintiffs’ individual claims of loss of society and companionship. The jury awarded compensation in the amount of $1,710,000 to the deceased’s husband, Thomas Patterson, and her two daughters, Hallie and Brandy Nettles, for these individual claims. The minor daughters subsequently settled their claims and no longer are involved in this case. Case Number: 02-0002-CT |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | RIVER REGION MEDICAL CORPORATION d/b/a
PARKVIEW REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER |
JASON EDWARD DARE,
L. CARL HAGWOOD,
DAVID MARK EATON |
|
|
| Appellee: | THOMAS PATTERSON | PAUL KELLY LOYACONO, WILLIAM ALLEN HOOD, WILLIAM A. PYLE, JOHN DENVER FIKE | ||
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: | Wrongful death - Section 11-7-13 - Proof of individual claim |
| Summary of the Facts: | Hallie and Brandy Nettles, the daughters of decedent Jennifer Nettles, brought a wrongful death action against River Region Medical Corporation. Thomas Patterson, decedent’s estranged husband, later joined the suit. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to River Region as to the claims of the deceased’s estate and plaintiffs sought no other economic damages. The remaining claims at trial were the plaintiffs’ individual claims of loss of society and companionship. The jury awarded compensation in the amount of $1,710,000 to the deceased’s husband and her two daughters for these individual claims. The minor daughters subsequently settled their claims and no longer are involved in this case. River Region appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | River Region argues that Patterson put on no evidence as to his individual claim. At trial, plaintiffs put on six witnesses, who all testified regarding the defendant’s liability. No witnesses testified to plaintiffs’ claims for loss of society and companionship. Patterson argues that, as a statutory wrongful-death beneficiary, he is not required to prove individual damages. Patterson is correct in that his relationship to the decedent is all that is required for him to recover a share of the damages which the decedent could have recovered if death had not ensued. Such damages could include, among others, the decedent’s lost wages and pain and suffering. However, no such claims were presented at trial. And because at trial the jury considered only the individual claims of each plaintiff, Patterson bore the burden of proving his own claim of loss of society and companionship. This he did not do. Pursuant to section 11-7-13, assuming Thomas Patterson was a legitimate wrongful-death beneficiary, he would then be entitled to recover for himself any loss of society and companionship he might prove, and to share equally in the damages which might have been recovered by Ms. Nettles had death not ensued. By entering into the litigation and bringing an individual claim for loss of society and companionship and nothing further, Patterson was then charged with proving this claim. Since he failed to do so, River Region was entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to Patterson’s claim. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
