Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Trammel v. State

June 30, 1998

TRAMMEL
v.
STATE, ET AL



Before Bridges, C.j., Herring, And Southwick, JJ.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bridges, C.j., For The Court:

FRANCES TRAMMEL, APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI AND THE MISSISSIPPI COMMISSION ON NATURAL RESOURCES, BUREAU OF RECREATION AND PARKS, APPELLEES

THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED, PURSUANT TO M.R.A.P. 35-B

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/17/96

TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ROBERT LEWIS GIBBS

COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

BY: ROBERT E. SANDERS

NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY

TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT

Frances Trammell sustained a permanent injury to her eye while chaperoning a church youth group at John Kyle State Park in Sardis, Mississippi. In March 1985, Frances was supposed to be supervising a group of teenagers in the park's multipurpose gym when she took part in a girls' basketball game. During that time, several other girls brought their own tennis equipment into the gym and began hitting balls against the gym wall. A ball went astray and hit Frances while she was playing basketball. Five years later, in February 1990, Frances sued the State of Mississippi and the park bureau in both contract and tort. The original complaint was dismissed on sovereign immunity, but the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed and sent it back for trial. After a trial by jury in June 1996, the State and its park bureau was found not liable for Frances's injury. On appeal, Frances presents the following issues for our consideration:

I. THE LOWER COURT'S RULING ALLOWING TESTIMONY OF TWO DEFENSE EXPERTS DESIGNATED FOR THE FIRST TIME 19 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL WAS ERRONEOUS.

II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ALLOWING DEFENDANT TO SUBMIT JURY INSTRUCTIONS D-2 AND D-5 TO THE JURY.

III. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ALLOWING TWO DOCUMENTS PRESENTED BY THE DEFENSE INTO EVIDENCE.

IV. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING PLAINTIFF TO PUT FORTH EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT'S SUBSEQUENT REMEDIAL MEASURES ONCE THE DEFENSE HAD CONTESTED THAT SUCH MEASURES WERE NOT FEASIBLE.

V. WITH THE EXCLUSION OF THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT TESTIMONY, THE OVERWHELMING WEIGHT OF THE ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.