Court Opinion

ID: 9448073
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 23:22:37.783386+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:17.093506
License: Public Domain

BIGGS, Chief Judge
(dissenting).
The trial court wrongly charged the jury several times as to the defendant’s liability imposing the test of proximate causation and, contrary to the statement contained in this court’s opinion, added an erroneous explanation as to how that test was required to be applied under the circumstances at bar. The trial court also charged the jury correctly at least twice, that if the defendant’s negligence played any part, however small, in causing the plaintiff’s injuries, he might recover. This court has concluded that the correct portions of the charge were sufficient to wipe out the incorrect portions. But an examination of the first and vital interrogatory put to the jury at the very end of the charge, and answered by the jury in the negative, will demonstrate *28beyond doubt that the trial court actually imposed on the jury proximate causation as the test of negligence.
The charge as given was prejudicial to the plaintiff and was timely and properly objected to by him. This court refuses to grant relief. For this reason I must respectfully dissent from the order denying rehearing.
I am authorized to state that Judge Staley joins in this dissent.