 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
VEREEN v. LIBERTY LIFE INSURANCE CO.5/13/1991
ficer on the scene who saw an eight foot trial of blood leading away from Vereen's body and who observed Vereen's hands clutching his chest with leaves and pine needles on them, as well as a photograph
A motion for directed verdict should not be granted when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, is susceptible of more than one reasonable inference. Grego v. South Carolina National Bank, 283 S.C. 546, 324 S.E.2d 94 (Ct. App. 1984). If there is any evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude a decedent experienced conscious pain and suffering, the issue must be submitted to the jury. See Croft v. Hall, 208 S.C. 187, 194-95, 37 S.E.2d 537, 540 (1946).
A reasonable jury could conclude from the proffered evidence that Vereen lived long enough to crawl eight feet from the point of the shooting and attempted to cover his wound with his hands. They could also infer that anyone who lived long enough to do these things lived long enough to experience conscious pain and suffering before his death. The directed verdict, therefore, should not have been granted.
For the reasons stated, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court directing a verdict for Liberty Life on the survival action, denying the motions of Vereen's representatives for a directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and a new trial on the issue of Liberty Life's liability for
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
GARDNER, J., and LITTLEJOHN, Acting J., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|