Brewer v. J. B. Hunt Transp., Inc. - 2009-1408 ( La. 03/16/10), 35 So. 3d 230

Rule:

Although the Louisiana Constitution extends appellate jurisdiction in civil cases to both law and facts, the exercise of this power is limited by the jurisprudential rule that factual determinations of the trier of fact will not be set aside by a reviewing court unless they are manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.

Facts:

The motorist's pickup truck rear-ended the 18-wheel tractor-trailer, crushing the entire front cab of the pickup beneath the 18-wheeler, resulting in permanent, life-altering injuries to the motorist. The motorist filed a personal injury action against applicants, a tractor-trailer owner and its operator. A jury found for the owner and the operator, finding the motorist 100 percent at fault. Conducting a de novo review of the record, the court of appeal concluded that the jury's factfinding process was interdicted by a legal error on the trial court's part in allowing the jury to hear references to the motorist's prior bad acts, which were irrelevant to the accident. The court of appeal found the owner and the operator 60 percent at fault. Their writ of certiorari application was granted.

Issue:

1. Did the court of appeal err in conducting a de novo review of the record? 
2. Did the jury err in determining that the owner and the operator were free from fault in the accident? 

Answer:

1) Yes. 2) Yes.

Conclusion:

The court held that court of appeal erred in conducting a de novo review of the record. The bad acts evidence was not directly relevant to the central issue of whether the owner and operator were at fault to any degree for the accident. Even if the bad acts evidence was erroneously admitted, that evidence did not interdict the jury's factual findings with respect to liability such that a de novo review was warranted. Accordingly, the supreme court expressly declined to review the admissibility of the bad acts evidence. Reviewing the judgment under the appropriate standard, the jury was manifestly erroneous in finding the owner and the operator free from fault. The court found the owner and the operator 30 percent at fault and the motorist 70 percent at fault for the accident.