Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A. v. McMahon

Supreme Court of Alabama

March 27, 2015

Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A., et al.
v.
Jacklyn McMahon

          Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court. (CV-08-00360).

         PARKER, Justice. Moore, C.J., and Stuart, Main, and Wise, JJ., concur. Bolin, Murdock, Shaw, and Bryan, JJ., dissent.

          OPINION

Page 146

          PARKER, Justice.

         AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

         See Rule 53(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), and (a)(2)(F), Ala. R. App. P.

         Moore, C.J., and Stuart, Main, and Wise, JJ., concur.

         Bolin, Murdock, Shaw, and Bryan, JJ., dissent.

          DISSENT

         BOLIN, Justice (dissenting).

         In McMahon v. Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A., 95 So.3d 769 (Ala. 2012) (" McMahon I" ), I concurred with Justice Woodall's special writing dissenting from this Court's reversal of the judgment as a matter of law (" JML" ) on Jacklyn and Donald McMahon's wantonness claim and concurring with the affirmance of the judgment as to the other claims. 95 So.3d at 775 (Woodall, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). Consistent with my position at that time -- that the trial court did not err in entering a JML in favor of the Yamaha defendants on the McMahons' wantonness claim -- I respectfully dissent from the Court's decision today affirming the trial court's judgment based on the jury verdict in favor of Jacklyn McMahon on the wantonness claim. On remand, even the trial judge, after hearing the evidence a second time, expressed her disagreement with submitting the wantonness claim to the jury:

" Okay. And, again, everyone knows we are back here because the Supreme Court has instructed us that they believe that there was a question on the wantonness which this court completely disagrees with.
" I've sat through both trials. And, again, if this was the first trial, I would be making the exact same ruling. We wouldn't be going to the jury on that.
" However, that is not my job. I'm going to follow the instructions of the Supreme Court which is they want it to go to the jury on the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.