Barbay v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.

457 So. 2d 1181
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 9, 1984
Docket84-C-1722
StatusPublished

This text of 457 So. 2d 1181 (Barbay v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barbay v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 457 So. 2d 1181 (La. 1984).

Opinion

457 So.2d 1181 (1984)

Katherine W. BARBAY
v.
AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY CO., G.K. Technologies Sperry Rail Service Division, a Subsidiary of Automation Industries, Sentry Insurance Company & Missouri Pacific Railroad Company.

No. 84-C-1722.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 9, 1984.

*1182 Denied.

BLANCHE, J., would grant the writ.

LEMMON, Justice, would grant the writ.

When the jury is given an incorrect instruction, the appellate court must completely disregard the jury's verdict and either decide the case solely on the record or remand for a new trial. This rule is particularly applicable in this present case, since the incorrect instruction appears to be the only basis for imposing liability on relator.

I would remand the case to the Court of Appeal to decide on the record the percentage of fault, if any, attributable to relator, without regard to the quantification of fault by the erroneously instructed jury.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pizzo v. Graves
457 So. 2d 1181 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 So. 2d 1181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barbay-v-aetna-cas-sur-co-la-1984.