Kennedy v. Ill. Cent. R.R. Co.
| Docket Number: | 2008-CA-01831-SCT Linked Case(s): 2008-CA-01831-SCT ; 2008-CA-01831-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-11-2010 Opinion Author: Carlson, P.J. Holding: Reversed and remanded; The motion for rehearing filed by counsel for the appellee, Illinois Central Railroad Company is granted. The prior opinion is withdrawn and this opinion is substituted therefor. Reversed and Remanded. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Federal Employers’ Liability Act - Jury questions - Causation - Amount of damages Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Graves, P.J., Dickinson, Lamar, Kitchens, Chandler and Pierce, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Randolph, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-15-2008 Appealed from: PIKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Michael M. Taylor Disposition: The Pike County Circuit Court directed a verdict on the issue of damages in favor of Illinois Central Railroad Company, and thereafter entered a final judgment. Case Number: 06-274-PCT |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Robert W. Kennedy |
JOHN TIMOTHY GIVENS, TIMOTHY W. PORTER, PATRICK C. MALOUF, WILLIAM S. GUY, C. E. SOREY, II, WAYNE DOWDY |
|
|
| Appellee: | Illinois Central Railroad Company | LONNIE D. BAILEY, GLENN F. BECKHAM | ||
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 - Federal Employers’ Liability Act - Jury questions - Causation - Amount of damages |
| Summary of the Facts: | The motion for rehearing is granted, and this opinion is substituted for the original opinion. Robert Kennedy filed an action against Illinois Central Railroad Company pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act for damages he incurred as a result of alleged exposure to asbestos. After the defense rested its case-in-chief during the course of the trial, the circuit court directed a verdict on the issue of damages in favor of Illinois Central Railroad Company. Kennedy appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | To prevail under the FELA, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant is a common carrier by railroad engaged in interstate commerce; he was employed by the defendant with duties advancing such commerce; his injuries were sustained while he was so employed; and his injuries resulted from the defendant's negligence. The plaintiff’s burden of proving causation is significantly relaxed compared to the burden in an ordinary negligence action. The question is whether negligence of the employer played any part, however small, in the injury or death which is the subject of the suit. When there is proof, even though entirely circumstantial, from which a jury may with reason make this inference of employer negligence, the burden of the employee is met, and the obligation of the employer to pay damages arises. Here, the trial court ruled that there were questions for the jury with respect to duty, breach, and causation, or, in other words, that reasonable jurors could have returned a verdict for Kennedy as to these elements of a negligence claim; but, on the other hand, the court determined that on the issue of damages, there was no evidence to support a jury verdict for economic or noneconomic damages. Unless the evidence is so speculative that no reasonable juror could find more than nominal damages, the trial court may not direct a verdict against the plaintiff. A plaintiff should not be deprived of the right to recover simply because of the inability to prove with absolute certainty the extent of the loss. The amount of damages to be awarded to an injured litigant is primarily a question of fact for the jury. The record in this case provides evidence from which a reasonable juror could find noneconomic damages. The testimony from witnesses certainly created a question of fact for the jury with respect to pain, suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, and loss of the enjoyment of life. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
