Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Roland G. Desmarais, Administrator, Etc. v. Herbert A. Gentle, 342 F.2d 754, 1st Cir. (1965)
Roland G. Desmarais, Administrator, Etc. v. Herbert A. Gentle, 342 F.2d 754, 1st Cir. (1965)
2d 754
This is an action for wrongful death (only) of plaintiff's decedent, as the result
of the collision of a car and a truck on a Maine highway, brought in the district
court on the ground of diversity. The case was tried to the court, which found in
the defendants' favor both on the issue of their negligence and of the
contributory negligence of the deceased. Plaintiff appeals.
Basic to the appeal are two contentions with respect to evidence. One is that
because the case was tried to the court it was not necessary for the plaintiff to
object, and that if evidence was taken without objection the plaintiff was
nonetheless entitled to have the court disregard it when it came to make a
decision.* Plaintiff's second point is, if anything, even more novel. It is that
where he objected to certain testimony, but, following a conference at the
bench, agreed to a ruling excluding some, but admitting the balance, even that
balance to which he specifically (but, he now says, wrongfully) agreed should
not have been considered by the court because, as an administrator, plaintiff
had no authority to waive any rights of the estate.
Once the plaintiff's strictures with regard to the evidence are disposed of, we
are presented by detailed findings of fact against the plaintiff on his burden of
proving negligence, and in favor of the defendants on their burden of proving
contributory negligence. On the full record we find no merit in plaintiff's
contentions that either (he must prove both) of these sets of findings was
erroneous as matter of law.
Affirmed.
Notes:
*
"No objection was made because counsel rested confident that none of this was
admissible and, therefore, the court would ignore it." (Plaintiff's written
argument before this Court.)