HENRY v. REEVES (2020)

Writ application denied.

This is a left-turning auto accident case wherein Defendant made a left turn in front of Plaintiff, causing a collision. Plaintiff was alone in her vehicle, and there were two guest passengers in Defendant's vehicle.

Plaintiff filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. The trial court granted the motion, and the court of appeal denied writs. I disagree, finding the grant of partial summary judgment in this case to be legally impermissible.

It is hornbook that summary judgment is not allowed when there is an issue of comparative fault. Marengo v. Harding, 13-47 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/16/13), 118 So.3d 1200; Smith v. Howell, 19-452 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/30/19), 286 So.3d 564; Bloxham v. HDI-Gerling America Ins. Co., 52,177 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/27/18), 251 So.3d 601. In this case, Defendant and his two guest passengers claimed Plaintiff was speeding and/or distracted with no skid marks or evasive action taken when entering the intersection. This presents a genuine issue of material fact as to comparative fault, vel non, however slight, which defeats and prohibits the grant of a motion for summary judgment. In order to disregard the testimony of Defendant and his two guest passengers, the trial court must have weighed the evidence, which is likewise prohibited in a summary judgment procedure.

Hence, I would reverse the lower courts and deny the motion for partial summary judgment.

Hughes, J., would grant. Genovese, J., would grant and assigns reasons.