FROM : CLERK
OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
handed down on the 30th day of October,
2000 , are as follows:
JOHNSON, J. :
0066 BOBBY DUNCAN, ET AL. v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN
RAILWAY CO., ET AL (Parish of Beauregard)
For the aforementioned
reasons, the decision of the court of appeal insofar
as it finds KCS at fault and in the awarding of general
damages is affirmed. We reverse the percentages of
fault of KCS and Mitchell, to 33.3% and 66.7%, respectively,
and the award of future medical expenses for Rachel
Duncan is reduced to $10,528,722. We also reduce the
award of general damages to Rachel Duncan to $6,000,000.
The case is remanded to the trail court to confect
appropriate monetary judgments based upon the fault
PART, REVERSED IN PART, REMANDED.
not on panel. See Rule IV, Part 2, §3.
J., concurs in result and assigns reasons .
concurs for reasons assigned by Victory, J.
J., concurs in part and dissents in part with reasons.
KNOLL, J. :
0628 FLOYD JOSEPH v. BROUSSARD RICE MILL, INC. ET
AL (Parish of Calcasieu)
For the foregoing
reasons, we affirm that part of the JNOV which found
Floyd Joseph free from fault. We further reverse that
portion of the JNOV which held Broussard Rice Mill
100% at fault and which increased the damage award.
We reinstate the jury's damage award as amended in
the appellate court's judgment which increased damages
to $584,485. In accordance with our findings herein,
we reallocate fault 15.5% to Broussard Rice Mill and
84.5% fault to Lake Charles Stevedores.
PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND RENDERED AS AMENDED.
J., concurs in part and dissents in part and assigns
J., subscribes to the opinion and assigns additional
3471 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. NOEL E. DAUZART (Parish
relator's convictions and sentences are reversed and
this case is remanded to the district court for further
proceedings in accord with the law.
AND SENTENCES REVERSED; CASE REMANDED.
Ad Hoc, sitting for Calogero, C.J., recused.
0562 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ARTEMIO LOPEZ (Parish
of Marijuana With Intent to Distribute)
the judgment of the district court is reversed and
this case is remanded for further proceedings consistent
with the views expressed herein.
J., dissents and assigns reasons.