 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall v. Mississippi Department of Public Safety4/9/1998
the close of Plaintiff's case in chief, counsel for MDPS moved for dismissal, which was denied by the court. MDPS then presented its case in rebuttal. On June 27, 1996, MDPS moved for a directed verdict and/or dismissal. On July 3, 1996, Circuit Court Judge Kosta Vlahos entered an Order finding MDPS immune from liability for Hall's injuries.
Hall, aggrieved by the trial court's decision, appealed to this Court and raised the following issues:
I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY WAS IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY PURSUANT TO MISS. CODE ANN. § 11-46-9(1)(c)(2).
II. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT RULING IN HALL'S FAVOR ON THE QUESTION OF MDPS'S NEGLIGENCE.
III. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FAILING TO RENDER JUDGMENT IN PLAINTIFF'S FAVOR BASED ON A RES IPSA LOQUITUR THEORY.
IV. WHETHER MDPS WAIVED ITS IMMUNITY BY OBTAINING LIABILITY INSURANCE.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
This Court will not overturn the trial court's decision unless the decision was manifestly wrong or clearly erroneous. "When a trial Judge sits without a jury, this Court will not disturb his factual determinations where there is substantial evidence in the record to support those findings." Yarbrough v. Camphor, 645 So. 2d 867, 869 (Miss. 1994) (citing Omnibank of Mantee v. United S. Bank, 607 So. 2d 76, 82 (Miss. 1992)). "'Put another way, this Court ought and generally will affirm a trial court sitting without a jury on a question of fact unless, based upon substantial evidence, the court must be manifestly wrong.'" Id. (quoting Tricon Metal v. Topp, 516 So. 2d 236, 238 (Miss. 1987); Brown v. Williams, 504 So. 2d 1188, 1192 (Miss. 1987)).
However, " nterpretation of statutes is a matter of law rather than an issue for the jury... " Hernandez v. Vickery Chevrolet-Oldsmobile, Inc., 652 So. 2d 179, 182 (Miss. 1995). Furthermore, " his Court must review questions of law de novo." Gibson v. Bd. of Supervisors of Calhoun County, 656 So. 2d 312, 314 (Miss. 1995) (citing Harrison v. City of Gulfport, 557 So. 2d 780, 784 (Miss. 1990); Cole v. Nat'l Life Ins., 549 So. 2d 1301, 1303 (Miss. 1989); Busching v. Griffin, 542 So. 2d 860, 863 (Miss. 1989); Boggs v. Eaton, 379 So. 2d 520, 522 (Miss. 1980)).
LEGAL ANALYSIS
I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY WAS IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY PURSUANT TO MISS. CODE ANN. § 11-46-9(1)(c).
Mississippi statute provides governmental entities immunity from liability under certain circumstances. This statute states in pertinent part:
(1) A governmental entity and its employees acting within the course and scope of their employment or duties shall not be liable for any claim:
....
(c) Arising out of any act or omission of an employee of a governmental entity engaged in the performance or execution of duties or activities relating to police or fire protection unless the employee acted in reckless disregard of the safety and well-being of any person not engaged in criminal activity at the time of injury;. ..
Miss. Code Ann. § 11-46-9(1)(c) (Supp 1997).
On appeal, Hall argues that the trial court erred in finding the MDPS immune from liability in accordance with Miss. Code Ann. § 11-46-9(1)(c) because the officer's collective actions constituted reckless disregard for Hall's safety and because the officer's actions were not "police" activities as contemplated by § 11-46-9(1)(c). Hall averred in his Complaint that he was injured as a result of the officer's actions, specifically that the officer was negligent in th
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|