Slayton v. McDonald
690 So. 2d 914 · Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1997
Facts
Jimmy Slayton sued A.S. McDonald for damages resulting from a shooting where Daniel McDonald shot James Slayton in the leg after Slayton came to McDonald's house following a disagreement on the school bus. The trial court rejected Slayton's claim, finding that Slayton was the aggressor and McDonald acted reasonably in self-defense.
Issue
Did the trial court err in finding that Daniel McDonald acted reasonably under the circumstances and was justified in shooting James Slayton in the leg?
Holding
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that the trial court was not clearly wrong in its findings that Slayton was the aggressor and McDonald used reasonable force in self-defense.
Rule
Louisiana's aggressor doctrine precludes tort recovery where the plaintiff acts in such a way to provoke a reasonable person to use physical force in fear or anticipation of further injury at the hand of the aggressor plaintiff, unless the person retaliating has used excessive force to repel the aggression.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.