Mercer v. Theriot

Background

A family sued a driver in federal court in eastern Louisiana after a man was killed on a road leading from an island to the driver’s home. A jury awarded $25,000 to the family, and the trial judge denied the driver’s motions for a new trial and for judgment overturning the verdict. A federal appeals panel reversed, finding the evidence insufficient and noting trial errors; the family then offered additional evidence and sought review, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

Reasoning

The Court reviewed the asserted trial errors and the sufficiency of the evidence. It found the trial judge’s corrected instruction on circumstantial evidence was proper, that certain hearsay could not be seen as denying substantial justice (especially where the defense elicited it), and that the opening statement calling the driver a "hit-and-run driver" was not beyond permissible advocacy given the record. Looking at the facts the jury could reasonably have found—body location, tire marks, time, the driver’s heavy drinking, damage to the driver’s car, blue coloring on the hood matching the decedent’s clothing, a bloodstained towel hidden in the car, hair under the car, and soap residue—the Court concluded the evidence was sufficient under any appropriate standard.

Real world impact

The Court reversed the appeals court and directed the district court to enter judgment for the family in accordance with the jury’s verdict. The decision shows that corrected jury instructions and evidence elicited by defense counsel will not automatically require a new trial, and that substantial circumstantial facts can sustain a civil jury verdict.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Harlan dissented, arguing certiorari was improvidently granted and that the Court should not substitute its judgment for the lower courts on factual sufficiency and trial-error evaluations.