 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Jackson v. Daley6/3/1999
Large poles were used to remove the truck from the ditch, after which the truck driver drove away, leaving the poles on the highway. Id. That night a car traveling down the highway struck the poles, severely injuring the driver. Id. The driver was awarded a judgment against the Merchants Company, which was covered by an automobile liability policy with St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company containing the following language of agreement by St. Paul:
"To pay on behalf of the Insured all sums which the insured shall become obligated to pay by reason of the liability imposed upon him by law for damages * because of bodily injury * sustained by any person or persons, caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the automobile." Merchants, 187 Miss. at 306-07, 188 So. at 571 (emphasis added).
We held:
"Our Conclusion, under a policy such as is here before us, is that where a dangerous situation causing injury is one which arose out of or had its source in, the use or operation of the automobile, the chain of responsibility must be deemed to possess the requisite articulation with the use or operation until broken by the intervention of some event which has no direct or substantial relation to the use or operation,-which is to say, that the event which breaks the chain, and which, therefore, would exclude liability under the automobile policy, must be an event which bears no direct or substantial relation to the use or operation; and until an event of the latter nature transpires the liability under the policy exists." Merchants, 187 Miss. at 309, 188 So. at 572.
We found that the failure to remove the poles from the road was not an intervening cause of the accident under this definition, so there was liability under the St. Paul insurance contract. Id.
.Similarly, we find that the county employees' failure to remove the dirt piles or to maintain the road after the dump truck transported the dirt was not so remote as to bear "no direct or substantial relation to the use or operation" of the dump truck in this case. There was no intervening cause here to break the chain of responsibility. As a result, we find that Jackson's accident is covered by the U.S.F.&G; policy. The trial court did not err in refusing to dismiss the case against U.S.F.&G;
CONCLUSION
.We find that the blood and urine test results of the decedent were properly admitted into evidence and that all jury instructions were proper. We also hold that the trial court was correct in denying the plaintiff's motion to name U.S.F.&G; as a real party in interest, and in finding that the jury verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. However, the trial Judge did err when he overruled the plaintiff's objection to the statement of defense counsel made during closing argument. Jackson's accident is covered by the U.S.F.&G; Policy, and Jefferson Davis County's immunity is waived to the extent of that coverage. As a result, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case to the Jefferson Davis County Circuit Court for a new trial. In all other respects we affirm the judgment below.
.ON DIRECT APPEAL: AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.
ON CROSS APPEAL: AFFIRMED.
PRATHER, C.J., BANKS AND WALLER, JJ., CONCUR. McRAE AND COBB, JJ., CONCUR IN RESULT ONLY. MILLS, J., CONCURS IN PART AND DISSENTS IN PART WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION JOINED IN PART BY SMITH, J. PITTMAN, P.J., NOT PARTICIPATING.
MILLS, JUSTICE, CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART:
.As author of the former majority opinion in this cause, I do not
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|