City of Jackson v. Estate of Stewart
| Docket Number: | 2008-CA-01997-SCT Linked Case(s): 2008-CA-01997-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-14-2010 Opinion Author: Pierce, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Doctrine of the law of the case - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson, P.J., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Kitchens and Chandler, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Graves, P.J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-20-2008 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: In 2002, the Circuit Court of Hinds County in a bench trial found the City of Jackson liable for a fall sustained by an elderly woman, which the plaintiff alleged caused a stroke. Finding that a stroke was not foreseeable, the Miss. Supreme Court remanded the case for a new trial on damages. The trial court awarded the maximum amount of damages under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act, $250,000, after hearing testimony from Dr. Stephen Hayne, expert for the plaintiff, that the fall had caused a traumatic brain injury and not a stroke. Case Number: 251-98-816CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | The City of Jackson, Mississippi |
PIETER JOHN TEEUWISSEN, CLAIRE BARKER HAWKINS |
|
|
| Appellee: | The Estate of Otha Stewart, Deceased, By and Through its Administrator, Emma Womack | JAMES A. BOBO, MARK C. BAKER, SR., BERNARD C. JONES, 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 - Doctrine of the law of the case - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | In 2002, the Hinds County Circuit Court in a bench trial found the City of Jackson liable for a fall sustained by an elderly woman, which the plaintiff alleged caused a stroke. Finding that a stroke was not foreseeable, the Supreme Court remanded the case for a new trial on damages. The trial court awarded the maximum amount of damages under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act, $250,000, after hearing testimony from Dr. Stephen Hayne, expert for the plaintiff, that the fall had caused a “traumatic brain injury” and not a stroke. The City appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Doctrine of the law of the case The City argues that the award violates the doctrine of the law of the case. The doctrine provides that whatever is once established as the controlling legal rule of decision, between the same parties in the same case, continues to be the law of the case, so long as there is a similarity of facts. The plaintiffs failed under their old logic (a fall caused a stroke which caused various other maladies) because the stroke was not foreseeable. They crafted a new logic: a fall caused a traumatic brain injury which caused various other maladies. The Court’s prior decision certainly did not suggest that traumatic brain injuries are unforeseeable results of head injuries, so their new theory does not violate any law of the case. Issue 2: Weight of evidence The sole evidence offered at the new trial on damages – the testimony of Dr. Steven Hayne – is unavoidably contradictory to expert testimony offered by the plaintiff at the first trial. On the other hand, undisputed testimony from Stewart’s daughter from the first trial is that her mother’s fall immediately precipitated her deteriorating health, pain and suffering, and extensive medical bills. The inconsistencies in the evidence are troubling. By definition and by Dr. Hayne’s admission, the plaintiff’s experts ruled out the credibility and accuracy of each other’s diagnoses. But this inconsistency does not disqualify Dr. Hayne’s opinion. The inconsistencies between these experts testimony about why Stewart took such a drastic downturn so soon after the fall does not alter the uncontested fact that she did. The record is very clear that, though Stewart was disabled before the fall, her difficulties were exacerbated in the near term following her fall. And based upon the medical records entered into evidence, the trial court found that Stewart’s medical care cost more than $400,000 in those final years. Dr. Hayne offered an opinion which causally linked Stewart’s deterioration and rising medical costs to the negligent act of the City. The City offered no new evidence to rebut that opinion testimony. And the trial court found for the plaintiff within its discretion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
