Loughan v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
749 F.2d 1519 (1985)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
John Loughan (plaintiff) was a car mechanic. Loughan was injured when a rim-wheel assembly on which he was working came apart and hit him on the head. Loughan brought a products-liability suit against the manufacturer of the assembly, Firestone Tire and Rubber Company (Firestone) (defendant). Firestone sought to introduce evidence of Loughan’s drinking under Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 406. Firestone raised the issue outside the presence of the jury and presented, to the judge, evidence that Loughan’s drinking was habitual. Specifically, Loughan regularly carried a cooler of beer on the job and admitted to drinking while on the job. Loughan’s supervisor, who had supervised Loughan from 1971 to 1974, testified to the same. Additionally, Loughan’s supervisor from 1969 to 1971 testified that Loughan had been fired after complaints from customers that he was drinking on the job. The district court admitted evidence of Loughan’s drinking habit as evidence that Loughan had been drinking at the time of the accident. The jury ruled in favor of Firestone. Loughan appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hatchett, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
