Case ID: so2d_342/html/1112-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      TATE, J., DIXON, J., DENNIS, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William M. CARLTON, Jr. v. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. et al.
    No. 59308.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 16, 1977.
   In re: William M. Carlton, Jr. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, 340 So.2d 678, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans.

Writ denied. On the facts set forth in the opinion of the court of appeal, the result is correct.

TATE, J.,

concurs in the denial. I agree that a prejudicially erroneous evidentiary ruling deprives a jury verdict of its presumption of correctness, and thus requires an appellate court to decide the appeal on the basis of the record without the benefit of the “manifest error” presumption of correctness of the trial court judgment. See Broussard v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 188 So.2d 111 (La.App.3rd Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 249 La. 713, 190 So.2d 233 (1966). However, I am not convinced that such prejudicially erroneous trial ruling here occurred. Accordingly, supervisory review should here be denied, since the result appears to be correct under the facts found by the court of appeal in approving the trial jury’s apparent findings.

DIXON, J.,

dissents from the denial, and would grant and order the court of appeal to decide 1. whether the error complained of by plaintiff was prejudicial and probably affected the jury verdict; and 2. whether the court of appeal concluded that the record showed no causal connection between the second accident and plaintiff’s injury, the opinion can be misinterpreted to hold that even when there is such prejudicial error, the jury verdict will be upheld if supported by some evidence.

DENNIS, J.,

is of the opinion the writ should be granted.