Opinion ID: 1816953
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: garlon martin's contention

Text: Plaintiff Garlon Martin complains that our original opinion fails to note any disposition of his separate cause of action for loss of consortium. Because this case is being reversed and remanded as to Mrs. Martin, it follows his cause is likewise reversed and remanded. Palmer v. Clarksdale Hospital, 213 Miss. 611, 57 So.2d 476 (1952), cited by Martin has no applicability to this case because Mr. and Mrs. Martin chose to file a joint declaration as to each of their causes of action, their causes were tried together, and verdicts and final judgment was rendered in each. A new trial on damages alone was granted Mrs. Martin, and there was no necessity for the defendants to perfect an appeal in Mr. Martin's cause until final judgment was rendered in Mrs. Martin's cause. See: American Empire Life Insurance Co. v. Skill-Craft Builders, Inc., et al., 291 So.2d 735 (Miss. 1974). For the reasons stated above, the judgment of the lower court in favor of Laverne Martin and Garlon Martin against Dan Reikes, M.D., Carl Hale, M.D., D.G. Kobs, Jr., M.D., and Charles E. Strauss, M.D., is reversed and this cause remanded to the Circuit Court of Forrest County for a new trial. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL. PATTERSON, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., and PRATHER and ANDERSON, JJ., concur. WALKER, P.J., concurs in part and dissents in part. ROBERTSON, J., specially concurs. DAN M. LEE, J., joins in the specially concurring opinion of Justice Robertson in the case of Laverne Martin v. Dan Reikes, et al., dissents as to the reversal of Garlon Martin v. Reikes, et al. SULLIVAN, J., not participating.