 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dawson v. Townsend & Sons Inc.6/8/1999
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/17/1997
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. LEE J. HOWARD
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LOWNDES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: VERDICT FOR DEFENDANT
. The plaintiff brought suit for injuries sustained when he was purposefully stabbed by a fellow patron at the defendant's grocery store. A Lowndes County Circuit Court jury found that the other patron, who was not made a defendant, was solely responsible for the damages. On appeal the plaintiff argues that the jury should not have been instructed to allocate responsibility between the wilful acts of the other patron and the allegedly negligent acts of the store owner. We agree that this was error. However, we also find that the error did not impact the jury's determination that the store owner had no negligence at all. The evidence supports the jury's verdict and we affirm.
FACTS
. James Dawson was shopping for a birthday card in the Sunflower Food Store on Military Road in Columbus, Mississippi, on September 14, 1993, when he was attacked by John Williams. There is no suggestion that Dawson did anything to provoke the attack. After injuring Dawson, Williams left the store in unrushed fashion and displayed what appeared to be rather odd mannerisms. He was arrested by police and at the time of the trial was in the Mississippi State Hospital.
. Williams had been a regular customer at the store, shopping there a few times a week. Described as quiet, he displayed no violent tendencies though his mannerisms made at least one employee nervous. There was testimony that Dawson's wife had received a call from the store's assistant manager after the attack indicating the store had been concerned about Williams behavior and was "afraid something like this was going to happen." The assistant manager denied saying this, though she did admit calling Mrs. Dawson to inquire about Mr. Dawson's condition.
. The attack left a long deep scar across the left side of Dawson's face for which several corrective surgeries were performed. He testified to losing some 200 hours of work, though not all as a result of the attack, and suffering significant emotional distress. He also suffered physical pain, not only from the attack but from several of the subsequent surgeries.
. Dawson brought suit against the owner of the store, Townsend and Sons, Inc., for failing to protect him from the attack. John Williams was not made a party to the litigation.
DISCUSSION
I. Jury's consideration of absent intentional tortfeasor
. The appellant Dawson alleges error in the trial court's granting instructions that required that the jury consider Williams as at least partly responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. The jury after deliberations found Williams to be totally responsible. Dawson argues that Williams could not in this suit be considered at all.
. We divide the issues regarding the jury's consideration of the knife-wielding John Williams into two parts: 1) may a portion of responsibility be assigned to a person who is not a defendant in the case; 2) may responsibility be allocated between intentional and negligent participants in the events that caused injury? Since trial, the supreme court has answered one of those questions. The second is presented to us as the first state appellate court to consider the matter.
a. Assigning responsibility to an absent tortfeasor.
. The center of attention here is the meaning of Mississippi's statute on contribution among joint tortfeasors, Mississippi Code section 85-5-7. The
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|