Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_02-cv-00808/USCOURTS-alsd-1_02-cv-00808-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 340
Nature of Suit: Marine Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1333 Admiralty

---

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JANET M. COOK, individually and as the )

representative of the estate of ROBERT )

BRUCE COOK, deceased, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-0808-CG-L

)

ATWOOD OCEANICS, INC., and )

ATLANTIC MARINE, INC., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER ON JURY TRIAL

The above-styled action came on for trial by jury in the on June 15, 16 and 17, 2005, before the

Honorable Callie V. S. Granade, Chief United States District Judge. The jury was selected by the

Honorable Bert W. Milling, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge on June 1, 2005.

On June 15, 2005, prior to the jury being sworn, the court held an in camera hearing outside the

presence of the jury regarding the parties’ pretrial motions (Docs. 113, 121, 122, 124, 129, 130, and

132), which the court granted in part and denied in part, as specified below: 

Joint Motion for Designation of Deposition Testimony of Charles Laporte (Doc. 121)

GRANTED with exceptions as set forth on the record.

Joint Motion for Designation of Deposition Testimony of Dr. William E. Shell

(Doc. 122); Plaintiff’s Motion to Admit Leading Question in the Direct Examination 

of Dr. William Shell (Doc. 124), and Plaintiff’s Supplemental Motion for Designation

of Deposition Testimony of Dr. William E. Shell (Doc. 132) - Question at page

105, lines 7-9 admitted. Designations as set out in motions GRANTED.

Plaintiff’ Motion in Limine to Exclude Trial Testimony of James Gillenwater (Doc. 129)

Case 1:02-cv-00808-CG-D Document 141 Filed 06/21/05 Page 1 of 3
2

GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART in that plaintiff’s first objection

was overruled; plaintiff’s second objection was sustained; and plaintiff’s third objection

was sustained.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Admit the Trial Deposition Testimony of James Gillenwater

over the objection of Defendants (Doc. 130); GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN

PART and MOOT IN PART in that defendants’ first objection was overruled;

defendants’ second objection was sustained; defendant’s third objection was withdrawn; defendant’s fourth objection was overruled; defendant’s fifth objection was

overruled; and defendant’s sixth objection was sustained as to page 48, line 43 through

page 50, line 17. 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Admit Exhibits over Objection of Defendants in Pre-Trial

Order (Doc. 113) - DENIED as to plaintiff’s pretrial exhibits 21, 25, & 31 (plaintiff’s

trial exhibits 22, 20 & 21). Defendants withdrew objection to plaintiff’s pretrial

exhibit 32, and plaintiff withdrew pretrial exhibits 41 and 42. The court reserved 

ruling on plaintiff’s pretrial exhibits 33-40 until testimony presented. 

During the hearing the court advised counsel ofitsruling that punitive damages are not recoverable in this

action. Plaintiff orally moved for leave to file interlocutory appeal on the court’s ruling and to stay the case

pending appeal, and said motions were DENIED for the reasons as set forth on the record. Defendants

orallymoved to quashplaintiff’ssubpoena ducestecumserved onnon-partyDr. Ross, and the motionwas

GRANTED IN PARTand DENIED IN PART in thatDr. Ross was notrequired to appear; however,

he was to provide any of the requested documents that he was able to find to plaintiff’s counsel.

The jury was duly sworn, and trial commenced. Plaintiff presented her case-in-chief, and rested

on June 16, 2005. During plaintiff’s case, the parties agreed to amend their stipulation as to pecuniary

damages recoverable by plaintiff to include medical, funeral, burial, and other related expenses in the

amount of$15,115.12, making the totalamount ofstipulated,recoverable pecuniarydamages$502,724.12

if plaintiff prevails . The defendant orally moved for judgment as a matter of law at the close of plaintiff’s

case as to plaintiff’s claims for unseaworthiness and negligence against Atwood Oceanics, and her

Case 1:02-cv-00808-CG-D Document 141 Filed 06/21/05 Page 2 of 3
1Defendants’ Motion for Designation of Deposition Testimony of Dr. Larry Mitchell (Doc. 135)

is deemed to be MOOT as the excerpts designated by the defendants were read to the jury in open

court. 

3

negligence claim against Atlantic Marine, Inc. The court deferred ruling on the motion as to plaintiff’s

claims against Atwood Oceanics, Inc. and DENIED the motion as to plaintiff’s claims against Atlantic

Marine, Inc. for negligence for the reasons as set forth on the record. Defendant Atwood’s motion for

judgment as a matter of law wasrendered MOOT once the jury’s verdicts were returned. The defendant

then presented its evidence and rested.1 The court held a charge conference with counsel. 

On June 17, 2005, counselmade their closing argumentsto the jury, the court charged the jury on

the applicable law, and the jury commenced their deliberations.

Now, onthe 17thdayofJune, 2005, comesthe jurywho havingheardthe evidence, the arguments

of counsel, the charge of the court and having considered the same upon their oaths return their verdict ,

a copy of which is attached hereto, into open court with counsel present.

By separate document, the court will enter judgment in accordance with the verdict of the jury.

The following schedule isset for post trialpleadings:Plaintiff’s post trialbriefshall be filednotlater

than June 27, 2005; Defendants’ response shall be filed not later than July 18, 2005.

DONE and ORDERED this the 21st day of June, 2005.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-00808-CG-D Document 141 Filed 06/21/05 Page 3 of 3