Carter v. New Orleans Aviation Board

Fifth Circuit

Carter v. New Orleans Aviation Board

493 F.2d 460, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8818

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 3, 1974

DocketNo. 74-1167

StatusPublished

This text of 493 F.2d 460 (Carter v. New Orleans Aviation Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. New Orleans Aviation Board, 493 F.2d 460, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8818 (5th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The District Judge dismissed this personal injury case for want of jurisdictional amount after having examined medical reports submitted by plaintiff’s treating physician and a physician who examined her at the request of the defendants. In his oral findings delivered from the bench following a hearing, the District Judge based his dismissal on the predicate that all the medical history revealed severe preexisting degenerative arthritis which condition did not change after the accident, and, more specifically, that both medical reports showed there had been no aggravation of the preexisting condition.

The predicate was erroneous, and the defendants do not contend otherwise. Rather they urge that a district judge is not precluded by conflicting medical evidence from eváluating all the evidence and deciding under appropriate standards that jurisdictional amount is not present.¹ The short answer is that that is not what the District Judge did in this case, and the dismissal must be and is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

PER CURIAM:

The District Judge dismissed this personal injury case for want of jurisdictional amount after having examined medical reports submitted by plaintiff’s treating physician and a physician who examined her at the request of the defendants. In his oral findings delivered from the bench following a hearing, the District Judge based his dismissal on the predicate that all the medical history revealed severe preexisting degenerative arthritis which condition did not change after the accident, and, more specifically, that both medical reports showed there had been no aggravation of the preexisting condition.

The predicate was erroneous, and the defendants do not contend otherwise. Rather they urge that a district judge is not precluded by conflicting medical evidence from eváluating all the evidence and deciding under appropriate standards that jurisdictional amount is not present.¹ The short answer is that that is not what the District Judge did in this case, and the dismissal must be and is reversed and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 F.2d 460, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-new-orleans-aviation-board-ca5-1974.