West v. Williams
| Decision Date | 15 March 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 46121,46121 |
| Citation | 245 So.2d 591 |
| Parties | Joseph R. WEST, Defendant/Appellant, v. Frances Kay Hodge WILLIAMS, Administratrix of Estate of John Everett Williams, Deceased, Plaintiff/Appellee. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
W. S. Murphy, Lucedale, for defendant-appellant.
Holcomb, Connell & Fleming, Rives Neblett, Clarksdale, for plaintiff-appellee.
This is an appeal by Joseph R. West from a judgment of the Circuit Court of George County. The judgment of $200,000 was awarded to the administratrix of the estate of John Everett Williams who was shot and killed by West. This was the second trial of the case since the jury award of $10,000 in the first trial was set aside by the lower court due to the inadequacy of the damages.
The appellant contends on appeal that the lower court erred in directing the jury to find for the plaintiff in both trials of the cause; the verdict of the jury on the second trial is contrary to the weight of the evidence; and the verdict of the jury reflects bias and prejudice against the appellant.
The uncontradicted evidence reflects that plaintiff's decedent, Williams, was shot and killed without warning by the defendant while bird hunting upon the defendant's property. The only excuse offered by the defendant in explanation of his incredible action in taking the life of Williams was that he had requested the decedent to advise him before hunting on his property. This testimony is contradicted by the decedent's hunting companion, Paul Revere, who was also wounded by the shots fired by the defendant. He testified that they had obtained permission from West to hunt on his property and that West did not request to be advised of their presence on the day of the hunt.
We are of the opinion that there was no error on the part of the lower court in instructing the jury to find for the plaintiff in the first trial. Neither was there error in restricting the case to the question of damages only on the second trial. The record, without elaboration on our part, permits no other conclusion than liability on the part of West. We conclude that the court properly directed the jury to find for the plaintiff.
The next assignments of error are that the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence and reflects bias and prejudice against the appellant. Assuming that these assignments are directed to the amount of damages, since the jury was instructed to find for the plaintiff on liability, we again conclude these contentions to be without merit. The only contradiction in the evidence is whether the decedent was to advise the defendant of his presence on the day of the hunt or whether the previous permission granting them the right to hunt did not require this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coleman v. Associated Pipeline Contractors, Inc.
...224 Miss. 632, 80 So.2d 785, 792-793; accord, Stapleton v. Louisville & Nashville R. R., 5 Cir. 1959, 265 F.2d 738, 747; West v. Williams, Miss.1971, 245 So.2d 591; Langford v. Mecurio, 1966, 254 Miss. 788, 183 So.2d 150, 154. To be willful or wanton, "something more is required than mere i......
-
McGee v. Charles F. Smith & Sons, Inc.
...except not to harm him wilfully or wantonly." The same reduced duty of care is owed by a landowner to a trespasser. West v. Williams, 245 So.2d 591 (Miss.1971). McGee was trespassing on City property. Smith was performing a contract with the City and was occupying the property with the perm......