 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Gomez v. H. Yturria Land & Cattle Co.8/18/2005
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Rodriguez
This appeal results from a jury verdict in a wrongful death suit. Appellants, Elisa Gomez, individually and as representative of all the heirs of Fidel Gomez and of the Estate of Fidel Gomez, Alexias Fidel Gomez, and Aurelio Archangel Gomez, filed suit under the Texas Wrongful Death Act against appellee, H. Yturria Land & Cattle Company, for the death of Fidel Gomez. A jury returned a verdict against appellants, and the trial court signed a judgment that appellants take nothing against appellee. In four issues, appellants contend the trial court committed harmful and reversible error by allowing appellee to amend its designation of experts and by admitting the death certificate and pathology report into evidence. We affirm.
Because the issues of law presented by this case are well settled and the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite the law and facts in this opinion except as necessary to advise the parties of our decision and the basic reasons for it. See TEX. R. APP. P.47.4.
A. Standard of Review
It is well settled that we review a trial court's decisions on the admission or exclusion of evidence only to determine if the trial court abused its discretion by acting without regard for any guiding rules or principles. Exxon Pipeline Co. v. Zwahr, 88 S.W.3d 623, 629 (Tex. 2002); Gammill v. Jack Williams Chevrolet, 972 S.W.2d 713, 718-19 (Tex. 1998); Matagorda County Hosp. Dist. v. Burwell, 94 S.W.3d 75, 81-82 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2002, pet. filed). A challenge to a trial court's evidentiary rulings will be successful only if, after a review of the entire record, we determine that the error was harmful in that the judgment turns on the particular evidence excluded or admitted. City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750, 753-54 (Tex. 1995). We will not reverse a trial court's judgment for erroneous rulings on admissibility of evidence when the evidence in question is cumulative and not controlling on a material issue dispositive to the case. Tex. Dep't of Transp. v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608, 617 (Tex. 1999) (citing Gee v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 765 S.W.2d 394, 396 (Tex. 1989)).
B. Death Certificate
In their third issue, appellants contend the trial court erred by admitting into evidence the death certificate of Fidel Gomez.
The Texas Health and Safety Code provides that " copy of a birth, death, or fetal death record registered under this title that is certified by the state registrar is prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the record." TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. ยง 191.052 (Vernon 2001). Applying section 191.052, Texas courts have specified that a recitation in a death certificate regarding the cause of death constitutes prima facie evidence that is subject to rebuttal. See Stroburg v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 464 S.W.2d 827, 829 (Tex. 1971) (noting that recitation in death certificate as to cause of death constituted prima facie evidence that condition stated contributed to insured's death); Hinojosa v. Columbia/St. Davids Healthcare Sys. L.P., 106 S.W.3d 380, 387 (Tex. App.-Austin 2003, no pet.) (finding that statement in death certificate that infant survived for twenty minutes after birth constituted prima facie evidence to defeat summary judgment); Continental Cas. Co. v. Fountain, 257 S.W.2d 338, 343 (Tex. Civ. App.-Dallas 1953, writ ref'd) (finding death certificate was certified by state registrar and was, therefore, prima facie evidence that decedent died of cancer).
The record shows that Fidel Gomez's death certificate was certified by the state registrar, thereby meeting the requirements
Page 1 2 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|