IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-31038
Summary Calendar
DAVID WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GLOBAL MOVIBLE OFFSHORE, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 95-CV-1689-D
- - - - - - - - - -
July 17, 1997
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
David Williams appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion for a continuance made on the day of trial, award of
damages, and assessment of 10% fault against Williams.
We review the district court’s denial of a motion to
continue trial for abuse of discretion, and will reverse the
district court only if its ruling was arbitrary and clearly
unreasonable. Dorsey v. Scott Wetzel Services, Inc., 84 F.3d
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R.
47.5.4.
No. 96-31038
- 2 -
170, 171 (5th Cir. 1996); Transamerica Insurance Co. v. Avenell,
66 F.3d 715, 721 (5th Cir. 1995). The medical testimony of the
various doctors was not so unclear as to Williams’ diagnosis and
prognosis that the district court abused its discretion in
denying the continuance for want of additional evidence.
We review the district court’s award of damages and
assessment of 10% comparative fault against Williams for clear
error. Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools, 82 F.3d 615, 620 (5th Cir.
1996); Avondale Industries, Inc. v. International Marine
Carriers, Inc., 15 F.3d 489, 492 (5th Cir. 1994). Clear error
exists when, “the reviewing court upon examination of the entire
evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a
mistake has been committed.” Justiss Oil Co. v. Kerr-McGee
Refining Corp. 75 F.3d 1057, 1062 (5th Cir. 1996).
The evidence indicates that Williams was improved five
months following the accident, that he suffered from low grade
reflex sympathetic dystrophy, and that he should recover fully
within a reasonable amount of time. The district court’s award
of two years of lost wages and $25,000 in general damages was not
clear error.
The district court did not commit clear error in
apportioning 10% fault to Williams for not positioning himself in
such a way to better alert him to the one ton basket’s movement,
a risk known to him. Gautreaux v. Scurlock Marine, Inc., 107
F.3d 331, 338-39 (5th Cir. 1997).
No. 96-31038
- 3 -
AFFIRMED.