Hamilton v. Walker
Louisiana Court of Appeal
893 So. 2d 1002 (2005)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
On October 22, 1999, a vehicle driven by Charles Walker (defendant) collided with a vehicle driven by Bonnie Hamilton (plaintiff) at an intersection. Hamilton asserted that she had a green light to cross at the intersection. An investigating police officer made a report of the accident and did not issue any citations. Hamilton subsequently sued Walker and Walker’s insurance company to recover for injuries she allegedly sustained in the accident. The trial court held a bench trial and considered evidence including the accident report, Hamilton’s testimony, deposition testimony from Hamilton’s treating physician, and deposition testimony from Walker. During Walker’s deposition, Walker testified that traffic approaching the intersection had a green light. However, Walker also testified that after the accident, he got out of his vehicle and accused Hamilton of running a red light. According to Walker’s testimony, Hamilton did not respond to Walker’s accusation. However, there was no evidence at trial suggesting that Hamilton even heard the accusation. Furthermore, neither party questioned Hamilton during the trial about her lack of response to Walker’s accusation, and neither party mentioned Hamilton’s lack of response to the accusation during closing arguments. After considering the evidence, the trial court found Walker 100 percent at fault for the collision and awarded damages to Hamilton. Walker and his insurer appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal. Walker argued that Hamilton’s failure to deny the allegation that she ran the red light was an adoptive admission that supported finding Hamilton liable for the collision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Saunders, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.