In re the Estate of Guillory
| Docket Number: | 2004-CA-01930-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-21-2006 Opinion Author: Lee, P.J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Juror misconduct - M.R.E. 606(b) - Damages - Section 41-9-119 Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers, P.J., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-16-2004 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: W. Swan Yerger Disposition: JURY VERDICT IN FAVOR OF GUILLORY IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500 Case Number: 251-02-1126 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Mary Alice Jackson, Administratrix |
SORIE S. TARAWALLY |
||
| Appellee: | Terry McGee | MICHAEL F. MYERS |
|
|
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 - Juror misconduct - M.R.E. 606(b) - Damages - Section 41-9-119 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Roy Guillory was rear-ended by Shameka West. West’s vehicle was rented from Enterprise Rent-A-Car by Terry McGee. Guillory filed suit against West, Enterprise and McGee. Guillory died during the course of the litigation, and Mary Alice Jackson was substituted as Guillory’s representative. Jackson settled the claims with Enterprise and obtained an entry of default against West. Prior to trial, the trial court entered a default judgment against McGee on the issue of liability due to his failure to cooperate in discovery. The case was tried by jury solely on the issue of damages. The jury returned a verdict for Jackson in the amount of $1500. Jackson appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Juror misconduct Jackson argues that the introduction of extraneous evidence into the jury room during jury deliberation and the consideration of such evidence by the jury in reaching a verdict is improper. M.R.E. 606(b) is a rule of competency, allowing a juror to testify whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention. Once an allegation of juror misconduct arises, the court must determine whether an investigation is warranted. An investigation is warranted if the party alleging misconduct overcomes the presumption that the jury was impartial. Jackson argues that as the jury began deliberations, three documents which were marked for identification purposes only were submitted to the jury along with the trial exhibits. These documents consisted of a letter from Dr. Joseph Pierre, who owned the clinic which treated Guillory, to Jackson’s attorney; the Jackson Police Department’s accident report; and a page bearing four photographs depicting the vehicle driven by Guillory. Three members of the jury were called to testify at the posttrial hearing. At best, the testimony at the hearing established that some pictures were submitted to the jury. Only one juror had any recollection of reviewing the offending documents. This is not sufficient to overcome the presumption that the jury was impartial. In addition, if the improper evidence was actually submitted to the jury, the evidence was consistent with the testimony presented by Jackson’s own witnesses. Issue 2: Damages Jackson argues that he should be allowed a new trial on the issue of damages or an additur in the amount of $20,000. A jury award will not be set aside unless so unreasonable in amount as to strike mankind at first blush as being beyond all measure, unreasonable in amount and outrageous. Jackson identified four bills for medical services which totaled $772, and Dr. Edward Hunt, who treated Guillory at the Pierre Chiropractic Clinic, identified a bill for his services in the amount of $1,535. Although Dr. Hunt testified to the cost of the services he provided, Jackson testified that she did not possess a bill for Dr. Hunt’s services. Section 41-9-119 dictates that Guillory’s medical bills are prima facie evidence of their necessity and reasonableness. Thus, the award is neither outrageous nor unreasonable. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
