Title: McCorkle v. Hughes

State: mississippi

Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court

Document:

244 So. 2d 386 (1971) Sarah C. McCORKLE v. Bobbye B. HUGHES. No. 46048. Supreme Court of Mississippi. February 8, 1971. Rehearing Denied March 1, 1971. Davidson & Beach, Jackson, for appellant. Satterfield, Shell, Williams & Buford, Cary E. Bufkin, Douglas R. Duke, Jackson, for appellee. ROBERTSON, Justice. The Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, after a separate and preliminary hearing, sustained the defense set up in the answer as a plea in bar. That defense was that the appellant, Sarah C. McCorkle, had knowingly and voluntarily executed a general release of all damages resulting from the accident. On May 30, 1967, the appellant, 69 years of age, was injured in a motor vehicle accident involving her adult daughter's car and the automobile of the defendant, Bobbye B. Hughes, when her head hit the windshield and her left knee the dashboard. Dr. M.B. Tumlinson, a general practitioner, treated appellant at the emergency room of the Baptist Hospital in Jackson. X-rays of the neck and knee revealed no fracture but did show a considerable amount of degenerative arthritis of the neck. Dr. Tumlinson prescribed muscle relaxants for the muscle spasms he found in the neck and shoulder. After several office visits, the last of which was on August 22, 1967, Dr. Tumlinson's final diagnosis was "a post-traumatic aggravation of a pre-existing degenerative arthritis of the neck." He referred her to Dr. William C. Warner, an orthopedic surgeon, who examined her on September 5, 1967, and rendered a written report to appellant's attorneys on July 31, 1968. Dr. Warner stated that x-rays revealed no apparent fractures but moderately severe degenerative arthritis of the cervical spine and degenerative disc disease. At his suggestion appellant received physical therapy *387 and her condition gradually improved. His final prognosis was: The appellant testified that about a week after the accident, Billy H. Stephens, who told her that he was an adjuster for the United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, began to call on her and inquire as to her condition. Thereafter, he called regularly once or twice a week. At his instance, she secured a detailed medical report from Dr. Tumlinson on August 22, 1967, which she read and handed to Stephens. In this written report. Dr. Tumlinson reiterated his previous diagnosis and prognosis: Appellant testified that she had been on her own since her husband died in 1954; that she had two adult daughters who had worked for insurance companies for 18 years; that she had 3 1/2 years of college and work experience, which both the United States Government and the State of Mississippi recognized as the equivalent of a college degree. After the accident she continued to drive her own car and missed no time from work. On August 23, 1967, when she came to work about 10:00 a.m., Mr. Stephens, the adjuster, was waiting for her. She gave him Dr. Tumlinson's report of August 22, 1967, and the complete file folder of her medical and hospital bills. He took the report and file folder to his office and returned in about an hour with a check for $137.75, the total of all of her bills. She asked about future bills, and was advised that this would be a final settlement. She told Stephens that $137.75 was just not enough, that Stephens agreed with her, and told her that he would go back and "talk to my company". After lunch, Stephens returned to her office with another check for $400.00. He tendered these two checks totaling $537.75 to her, she accepted them and signed the general release reciting the consideration of $537.75 and dated August 23, 1967. Mrs. G.L. Therrell, a friend of Mrs. McCorkle's and Billy H. Stephens signed the release as witnesses. On August 28, 1968, over a year after she signed the general release, Mrs. McCorkle brought suit against Bobbye B. Hughes for $35,000.00 damages. In her answer, Bobbye B. Hughes set up as her first defense that: Appellant in her reply admitted that she signed the general release, but alleged that there was a mutual mistake as to the nature and duration of appellant's injuries. She averred that she had additional injuries to her nervous system and nerve roots, and also severe muscle spasms; that $537.75 was so inadequate as to constitute a failure of consideration; that the person taking the release did not disclose his principal; that there was no meeting of the minds; and that the defendant's conduct (apparently through her agent, Mr. Stephens) constituted constructive fraud. After Mrs. McCorkle had testified at some length, the trial judge ruled that he would hear the case only as to the validity of the release. *388 When appellant finished her testimony, she called Dr. William B. Tumlinson as her witness. He testified that as he recalled the plaintiff wanted a written report of her condition "because the insurance company wanted to settle the case with her." The trial judge allowed appellant to summarize for the record the testimony of Dr. William C. Warner, orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Charles L. Neill, neurosurgeon, and Larry Tuminello, physical therapist. Appellant placed in the record the written report of Dr. Warner and Dr. Neill. Dr. Neill, in his written report of August 1, 1968, said: It is perfectly apparent from Dr. Warner's and Dr. Neill's reports that Mrs. McCorkle's injuries were correctly diagnosed by Dr. Tumlinson in his written report of August 22, 1967, which Mrs. McCorkle admitted reading before she signed the general release on August 23, 1967. We think that the trial judge's ruling: that there was no mutual mistake, that the appellant fully realized what she was doing when she signed the general release, and that there was no fraud and no overreaching, was fully supported by the evidence; and that the court was correct in sustaining the defense in the nature of a plea in bar and directing a verdict for the appellee. In Kohler v. Oliver, 114 Miss. 46, 74 So. 777 (1917), this Court quoted with approval from 5 R.C.L. 878: Later, in Fornea v. Goodyear Yellow Pine Co. et al., 181 Miss. 50, 178 So. 914 (1938), this Court said: *389 We adopt the opinion in Pearson v. Weaver, 252 Miss. 724, 173 So. 2d 666 (1965), wherein this Court said: The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Affirmed. GILLESPIE, P.J., and JONES, BRADY and INZER, JJ., concur.