 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wal-Mart Stores6/6/2002
imed. The record should have been supplemented so that this issue could have been properly examined by the Court.
III.
. The majority affirms the verdicts in favor of Mr. and Mrs. Frierson, finding that they were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. I respectfully disagree.
. Mrs. Frierson's claim against Wal-Mart was for loss of consortium. Regarding a claim for loss of consortium, we have previously said, "The interest sought to be protected is personal to the wife and arises out of the marriage relation.... It should be kept in mind always that the wife's recovery is for losses suffered by her. Tribble v. Gregory, 288 So. 2d 13, 16-17 (Miss. 1974). We also limited the recovery allowed by a wife claiming loss of consortium to exclude recovery for:
loss of financial support by the husband, recovery for nursing services and recovery for pain and suffering of the husband because these are items that he may recover in a suit by him. Id. at 17.
. The majority relies on Purdon v. Locke, 807 So. 2d 373 (Miss. 2001), in which this Court found that the evidence presented supported the wife's claim for loss of consortium. Purdon is distinguishable from the case sub judice. In that case, Rita Locke testified that her husband's emotional and physical change in behavior adversely affected their relationship. She testified that he would sleep in the chair, rather than in their bed, and that he did not care to be around her as he did before his injury . Rita Locke's testimony was supported by that of her husband, who testified that his emotional instability had affected his relationship with his wife. We found that this testimony supported the jury's finding of loss of spousal assistance and affection.
. In the case at bar, the only evidence presented to support Mrs. Frierson's claim was her testimony. The only portion which comes close to addressing her claim is as follows:
Q: . . .Your claim is for the way his fall and his injuries from the fall have affected you.
A: Right.
Q: Can you tell [the jury] about that?
A: Well, if - - when a person is sick, he can be very irritable and he can't put his feelings out on nothing but the one who's right there with him, and some time it get very bad and for me have to say . It run my blood pressure up. I'm under a doctor's care and so it's been pretty stressful.
. The remainder of Mrs. Frierson's testimony relates solely to her husband's pain and suffering. No further evidence was introduced to support Mrs. Frierson's claim. There was absolutely no evidence offered to show how Mr. Frierson's injuries have affected his relationship with his wife. Mrs. Frierson offered no medical testimony regarding any increase in her blood pressure. The testimony that Mr. Frierson is irritable and her caring for him is stressful is simply insufficient to support the jury's award in this case.
. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.
WALLER, J., JOINS THIS OPINION IN PART.
WALLER, JUSTICE, CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART
. I concur with the majority that circuit court properly allowed into evidence all medical expenses incurred by Turner Frierson, notwithstanding the fact that part of the medical expenses were written off by Medicaid and Medicare. See Brandon HMA, Inc. v. Bradshaw, 809 So. 2d 611 (Miss. 2001). Judge Evans improperly drew upon his mother's case in deciding to admit the evidence, but this error is harmless because the expenses were properly admitted into evidence.
. I respectfully disagree with the majority's conclusion that th
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|