Woodrow Harrell VS Glynn Hall, Black's Auto Salvage and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2008 CA 2467 WOODROW HARRELL VERSUS GLYNN HALL BLACK S AUTO AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY IJ Judgment Rendered JUN 1 9 2009 AJIl Appeal from the 18th Judicial District Court In and For the Parish of West Baton Rouge On Trial Court No Division 409 34 Honorable J Robin Free B Judge Presiding Woodrow Harrell Plaintiff Appellant Oakdale LA In Richard S Thomas Counsel for Defendants Baton Black Rouge LA Proper s Person Appellees Auto and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company BEFORE PETTIGREW McDONALD AND HUGHES JJ HUGHES J In this of an Woodrow Harrell urges the appeal plaintiff appellant adverse judgment rendered in his suit for Glynn Hall Black Company reasons on the basis that the trial that follow damages against defendants and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Auto s nullity held in was improper an For the venue affirm we FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mr Harrell an alleges that unmanned truck owned employee Glynn June 23 was Louisiana He s held was The injured on prison be tried to original participated by telephone that date in Oakdale A trial date in the judge would file motion a enroll to as on s Mr Dedrick Moore Mr At fourth attorney in this suit attended the conference in person the conclusion of the conference and s on attend the scheduled trial to the when custody of Black case was set to the federal at therefore unable was 1 was Rouge Parish but sometime prior arrested and detained Mr Harrell chambers Auto and in the s into his vehicle ran conference telephone Harrell by Black 2006 in West Baton Harrell Mr Hall November 10 2003 he on the record Mr Moore stated that he counsel which he did Because the Oakdale warden would not release Mr Harrell to attend his trial and for the purpose of in his trial it participate the Oakdale parish by is not a either Mr conducted I prison The at property preponderance suggested by located in Allen proper venue Harrell the federal damage was to or Mr Harrell to allowing the court s his attorney and live and that the trial be held Although admittedly parish for Mr Harrell testify cause on no August objection 16 was at Allen made 2006 trial was prison Mr Harrell s vehicle was ofthe testimony indicated that Mr Harrell accident 2 settled was not prior to trial At trial the in his vehicle at the time ofthe Harrell and his Mr Anthony venue Winters Jerome at attorneys all present and were the record on two Also present Chaney Calvin Edwards at the time Dedrick Moore and waived any specifically the trial objection to plaintiff s witnesses were and Officer Drew White the investigating officer At the conclusion of the trial Harrell s nullified After Thereafter Mr Harrell filed claims the basis that the trial on contradictory hearing wherein Mr Harrell Harrell judgment s request a was denied a rendered was to petition conducted judgment was was at have the Mr ruling improper an signed dismissing venue 28 2008 July on It is from that judgment that Mr appeals LA W AND ARGUMENT Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 197 B testimony in states pertinent part When in any judicial proceeding the of an inmate is required by law to be given in open court when an inmate is a party to a judicial proceeding under circumstances giving him the legal right to be present in open court at any stage of the proceeding or when the presence of an inmate witness in open court is requested and is justified under the facts and circumstances of the case the trial judge in his discretion may order any of the timely by a party to litigation following The 1 be court convened and the or the testimony of the inmate be taken proceedings conducted at the institution wherein the inmate is confined As such such measures participate we in find that it an effort taking agreed to Mr Harrell s within the trial court assist Mr Harrell in his in his trial Moreover Harrell and his counsel either to was a s discretion ability to to take attend and review of the record shows that both Mr have the trial at the federal testimony by deposition 3 or via prison in lieu of telephone And although Mr Harrell claims that he because of the was prejudiced by inability of his witnesses to travel to witnesses attended the Oakdale trial than more scheduled trial date in Port Allen Harrell s witness did We find Oakdale trial of the trial not appear at court no merit is affirmed plaintiff appellant 2 In fact Oakdale we appeared on Jerome note that the first Chaney Mr the Port Allen trial but did appear for the to Mr All Mr the unorthodox locale Harrell costs of this s arguments appeal are The judgment assessed against Woodrow Harrell AFFIRMED 2 Mrs Black stipulated defendants was not on the only witness not present at the Oakdale trial Her testimony however was The stipulation was agreed to by the attorneys for both plaintiff and Moreover Mrs present establishing effect was to on the record on Black s testimony was the date ofthe accident Her that she did that vehicle on own in no way harmful to Mr Harrell s case She was necessary only for the purpose of testimony the unmanned vehicle and that there the date ofthe accident 4 was a policy of insurance in
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
