City of Jackson v. Presley
| Docket Number: | 2008-CA-00381-COA Linked Case(s): 2008-CT-00381-SCT ; 2008-CA-00381-COA ; 2008-CT-00381-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-17-2009 Opinion Author: BARNES, J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Tort Claims Act - Adoption of party's findings & conclusions - Reckless disregard - Section 11-46-9 - Contributory negligence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., GRIFFIS, ISHEE, ROBERTS, CARLTON AND MAXWELL, JJ. Dissenting Author : IRVING, J., without separate written opinion. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-18-2007 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: W. Swan Yerger Disposition: JUDGMENT ENTERED IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF Case Number: 251-99-465-CIV |
|
| Note: | This judgment was later reversed and rendered by the Supreme Court on 7/29/2010. See the SCT opinion at: http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO64016.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI, AND
MIRANDA MORTON |
PIETER JOHN TEEUWISSEN, CLAIRE BARKER HAWKINS |
|
|
| Appellee: | LYNDA KEY PRESLEY | ROBERT P. MYERS, JR. |
|
|
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 - Tort Claims Act - Adoption of party's findings & conclusions - Reckless disregard - Section 11-46-9 - Contributory negligence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Lynda Presley filed suit against Jackson police officer Miranda Morton and the City of Jackson, stemming from a vehicular accident between Presley and Officer Morton. Following a bench trial, final judgment was entered in favor of Presley. The City appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Adoption of findings and conclusions The City argues that it was error for the trial court to adopt Presley’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law verbatim. It is undisputable that the trial court adopted the identical findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by Presley. However, the Mississippi Supreme Court has long held that it is not reversible error and within the trial court’s sound discretion to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by one party verbatim. The City argues that since the trial judge adopted Presley’s findings verbatim, the appellate court should apply a heightened scrutiny or a de novo review. However, when the trial judge adopts verbatim one party’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, his determination is entitled to deference, though sensibly not as much as in the ordinary case, and a heightened scrutiny applies. Issue 2: Reckless disregard The City is liable for Officer Morton’s acts under section 11-46-9 only if Officer Morton acted in reckless disregard for the safety of Presley. The standard of “reckless disregard” is a higher standard than gross negligence and embraces willful or wanton conduct which requires knowingly and intentionally doing a thing or wrongful act. Reckless disregard will be found when the conduct involved evinced not only some appreciation of the unreasonable risk involved, but also a deliberate disregard of that risk and the high probability of harm involved. The City argues that Officer Morton’s actions were merely negligent rather than reckless. The record shows that Officer Morton fully appreciated the risk of entering the dangerous intersection during extremely heavy rush-hour traffic and proceeded anyway across three lanes of traffic against the signal light with an obstructed view. Officer Morton agreed that it would be “unsafe,” “extremely dangerous,” and “ill-advised” to pull in front of the third lane of traffic on Woodrow Wilson Avenue with an obstructed view. She also knew this intersection was notoriously dangerous in general and had a history of injuries and fatalities. Further, Officer Morton could have chosen a different route to answer her call other than traversing an already dangerous intersection against the traffic light at rush hour. It is undisputed that both Presley and Officer Morton had obstructed views because of the bobtail truck, and Presley had the right-of-way because of the traffic light. Additionally, the call was not immediate in nature and did not require Officer Morton to utilize her police cruiser’s blue lights and sirens. A police sergeant stated that Officer Morton’s response to the call was inappropriate and inconsistent with the JPD’s general response orders. Thus, there was substantial, credible evidence to support a finding of reckless disregard for public safety on the part of Officer Morton. Issue 3: Contributory negligence The City argues that, in the alternative, the trial court failed to make a finding of contributory negligence on the part of Presley, and the Court should remand the case for an apportionment of fault. However, there is no evidentiary basis in the record to support a finding of contributory negligence on the part of Presley. Her view was blocked by the bobtail truck; therefore, she could not see Officer Morton’s approach. Presley had a green light at the intersection. She was not speeding or violating any other rule of the road. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
