 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Stewart v. Calcasieu Parish School Board3/1/2000
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
The Plaintiff, Wiley Stewart, appeals the trial court's judgment dismissing his claim that the Defendants wrongfully terminated his health insurance coverage.
After thirty years working as a coach and teacher with the Calcasieu Parish school system, Wiley Stewart retired in 1987. At that time, he chose to continue his School Board sponsored health and life insurance coverage with Washington National Insurance Company by paying premiums. He asked that the premiums be deducted from his pension checks but was told that this option was not available.
At some time between December 1992 and February 1993 Stewart's insurance was canceled for non-payment. The Plaintiff brought this suit alleging wrongful termination. He also alleged that the Board was statutorily required to deduct premium payments from his pension checks. After a trial on the merits, the trial court instructed the jury that the law did not require the Board to deduct insurance premiums from pension checks. The jury found that the policy was properly canceled. The trial court then rendered judgment dismissing Stewart's claim pursuant to the jury verdict. Stewart appeals.
On appeal, the Plaintiff raises four assignments of error. He alleges that the instructions and jury verdict sheet were erroneous and misleading, that the court erred in commenting on the facts and the evidence; that the court erred in ruling on the question of whether deduction of premiums was mandatory, thus removing that issue from the jury; and, finally, that the verdict was contrary to the law and the facts.
JURY VERDICT
The standard of review applicable to jury verdicts is well settled. It is well settled that a court of appeal may not set aside a trial court's or a jury's finding of fact in the absence of "manifest error" or unless it is "clearly wrong," and where there is conflict in the testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable. Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330, 1333 (La.1978); Canter v. Koehring, 283 So.2d 716, 724 (La.1973). See also, Sevier v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 497 So.2d 1380, 1383 (La.1986); West v. Bayou Vista Manor, Inc., 371 So.2d 1146, 1150 (La.1979); Davis v. Owen, 368 So.2d 1052, 1056 (La.1979); Cadiere v. West Gibson Products Co., 364 So.2d 998, 999 (La.1978); A. Tate, "Manifest Error" Further observations on appellate review of facts in Louisiana civil cases, 22 La.L.Rev. 605, 611 (1962). The appellate review of fact is not completed by reading only so much of the record as will reveal a reasonable factual basis for the finding in the trial court, but if the trial court or jury findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse even though convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently. Where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder's choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong. Arceneaux, supra at 1333, Watson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Ins. Co., 469 So.2d 967 (La.1985). In applying the manifestly erroneous--clearly wrong standard to the findings below, appellate courts must constantly have in mind that their initial review function is not to decide factual issues de novo. See, F. Maraist, The Work of the Louisiana Appellate Courts for the 1978-1979 Term--A Faculty Symposium, Civil Procedure, 40 La.L.Rev. 761, 764 (1980); Comment, Appellate Review of Facts in Louisiana Civil Cases, 21 La.L.Rev. 402,
Page 1 2 3 Louisiana Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|