Court Opinion

ID: 9526828
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:24:45.350824+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:22:28.141055
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion
Faulconer, J.
— I would affirm the judgment of the trial court.
This appeal requires a consideration of the evidence set forth in the bill of exceptions. I agree with appellee’s contention in his motion to dismiss or affirm that such bill is not properly certified. The record discloses that the Honorable Russell Gordon, sole Judge of the White Circuit Court presided at the trial of this cause. The Judge’s certificate to the bill of exceptions is signed by Maurice Zerface, Judge, White Circuit Court, Indiana. There is no showing of any determination and court order as to the unavailability of the Honorable Russell Gordon or as to the reasons, if any, for his failure to sign said bill of exceptions. This prevents us from considering any alleged error depending upon the evidence. Winn v. O’Neal, Sheriff, etc. et al. (1957), 236 Ind. 264, 266, 139 N. E. 2d 536.
I further cannot agree with the majority’s conclusion that there is sufficient evidence, or reasonable inference therefrom, of wilfull and wanton misconduct by appellee’s decedent to take this case to the jury.
Taking the evidence most favorable to the appellant, against whom the verdict was directed, as true and drawing *506all reasonable inferences therefrom as we are required to do, Boswell v. Washington (1967), 142 Ind. App. 73, 221 N. E. 2d 184, 9 Ind. Dec. 346 (transfer denied), it is my opinion that appellant has failed to prove a prima facie case of. wilfull or wanton misconduct as those terms have been defined.and applied by our Supreme and Appellate Courts. Therefore, in my opinion, the trial court did not err in directing- a verdict for the appellee at the close of appellant’s evidence.
Note. — Reported in 236 N. E. 2d 72.