ANDREW W. SIEGEL, APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN EMPLOYERS' INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE

5th Cir. | 1964-05-05
No. 20628
331 F.2d 302 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1964) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings or jury instructions during the negligence trial.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued an insurance carrier for alleged negligence of its insured dentist during an operation. The jury returned a verdict against the plainti…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a judgment entered on a jury verdict adverse to the plaintiff in a negligence action against appellee, the liability insurance carrier of Dr. Harold E. Faget. It was alleged that Dr. Faget was negligent in performing a dental operation on appellant.

The errors assigned are based on claims that the Trial Court improperly allowed counsel for the appellee to state the applicable law to the jury in his opening statement, and that the Trial Court prejudiced appellant’s case during the course of the trial by asking improper questions, making improper statements, and by undue interference with his counsel. It is also asserted that the Trial Court erred in failing to charge on res ipsa loquitur, and in having charged on the doctrine of unavoidable accident.

The record demonstrates that the first of these errors is utterly devoid of merit. This is likewise true as to the second assignment. The trial judge, rather than abusing his discretion, was performing his role, indeed his duty, of maintaining orderly procedure in the trial, and of effecting clarification where indicated. Cf. Theriot v. Mercer, 5 Cir., 1959, 262 F. 2d 754.

The court properly followed the holding of Meyer v. St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co., La.App.1952, 61 So. 2d 901, affirmed on other grounds, La.Sup.Ct.1954, 215 La. 618, 73 So. 2d 781, in refusing to charge on res ipsa loquitur. The charge given on unavoidable accident was adjusted to the theory of the defense, and the proof relative thereto. The doctrine has been recognized in Louisiana since the case of New Orleans & Northeastern Railway Company v. McEvers and Murray, 1897, 49 La.Ann. 1184, 22 So. 675.

Appellant lost his case to a jury after a fair trial. No prejudicial error appearing, it follows that the judgment appealed from must be, and it is affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw