Opinion
NO. 2018 CW 0298
05-29-2018
RUBY GATLIN BICKHAM, WILBUR HAYES BICKHAM, JAMES HAYES BICKHAM, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF HIS MINOR CHILDREN, JAMES HAYES BICKHAM, II AND ALYSSA DAWN BICKHAM, AND MISTY BYRD BICKHAM v. CHARLES REGAN TOON, PROGRESSIVE SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, TERESA MARIE MINARIK, AND ABC INSURANCE COMPANY
In Re: Progressive Security Insurance Company and Charles Regan Toon, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of Washington, No. 106514. BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., McDONALD AND CHUTZ, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. This court declines to exercise its supervisory jurisdiction. The criteria set forth in Herlitz Construction Co., Inc. v. Hotel Investors of New Iberia, Inc., 396 So.2d 878 (La. 1981) (per curiam) are not met.
WRC
JMM
Whipple, C.J., concurs in part and dissents in part. I dissent and would grant the writ, in part, and reverse the portions of the trial court's February 14, 2018 judgment which allowed plaintiffs to inform the jury of the fact of the criminal convictions of defendant and allowed plaintiffs to introduce into evidence the jury verdict form from the criminal proceeding. Evidence of the conviction of driving while intoxicated is not admissible. See La. R.S. 14:98.1; La. Code Evid. art. 609. Evidence of the conviction of negligent homicide may be admissible for the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, upon a determination by the trial court that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect. If and when such evidence is sought to be introduced, and if found admissible, such evidence is limited to the name and date of the crime of conviction. Otherwise, such evidence is inadmissible and should be excluded. In all other respects, I would deny the writ application. COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT