Ansley Ragan Hegwood v. Mindy Dawn Williamson
| Docket Number: | 2005-IA-02194-SCT Linked Case(s): 2005-IA-02194-SCT ; 2005-IA-02194-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-04-2007 Opinion Author: WALLER, P.J. Holding: REVERSED AND REMANDED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Severance - M.R.C.P. 20(a) - Distinct litigable event - M.R.E. 411 - M.R.C.P. 42(b) Judge(s) Concurring: SMITH, C.J., COBB, P.J., EASLEY, CARLSON, DICKINSON AND RANDOLPH, JJ. Dissenting Author : DIAZ AND GRAVES, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-02-2005 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: Denied Appellant's Motion to Sever Case Number: 251-04-1136CIV |
|
| Note: | Nature of the Case: Property Damage & Medical Payments which arose out of car accident | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | ANSLEY RAGAN HEGWOOD |
JEREMY T. HUTTO
PHILIP W. GAINES |
||
| Appellee: | MINDY DAWN WILLIAMSON | CURT CROWLEY |
|
|
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: | Insurance - Severance - M.R.C.P. 20(a) - Distinct litigable event - M.R.E. 411 - M.R.C.P. 42(b) |
| Summary of the Facts: | After an automobile accident with Ansley Hegwood, Mindy Williamson sued Hegwood and her liability insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. Hegwood filed a motion to sever Williamson’s claims against Hegwood and State Farm. The court denied the motion, and the Supreme Court granted Hegwood permission to bring this appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | M.R.C.P. 20(a) provides that all persons may be joined in one action as defendants if there is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative, any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same transaction or occurrence, and if any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action. Before an alleged occurrence will be sufficient to meet Rule 20(a)’s two factors, there must be a distinct litigable event linking the parties. Here, the circuit court should have severed the claims. The third party tort claim against Williamson and the first party breach of contract and bad faith claims involve distinct litigable events. The claims against Williamson and State Farm arise out of separate allegations of wrongdoing occurring at separate times. While it is true that the genesis of both claims arose out of the accident, the two claims involve different factual issues and different legal issues. The negligence claim would be proven by different witnesses (the two drivers, eyewitnesses to the accident, law enforcement, and accident re-enactment experts) from that of the bad faith claim (insurance agents and management). More importantly, M.R.E. 411 provides that evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether he acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. Hegwood would be prejudiced if the jury learned of her insurance coverage while it was deciding liability and damages. M.R.C.P. 42(b), dealing with bifurcation of trials, also supports severance, since Hegwood would be unduly prejudiced because, if the two claims were tried together, the fact that she had liability insurance would be placed squarely before the jury. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
