THE CRAZY CASE OF JACOBS V. KENT
N ot Y our O rdinary T urkey S hoot
It began like any other hunting excursion. Neil Jacobs was walking softly through the bushes, looking for a spot to hunker down and watch for a flock of turkeys. The only problem was that someone beat him to that neck of the woods. James Kent had established a hunting spot for himself, and, when he heard rustling and gobbling in some nearby bushes and saw a flash of red, he took aim and fired. Unfortunately, the movement in the bushes was not a turkey. Kent was horrified to find that he had shot Jacobs. Jacobs promptly moved for a partial summary judgment against Kent on the basis that he had failed to determine that Jacobs was not a turkey but, in fact, a human being. Kent cross-moved for summary judgment, saying Jacobs should have expected risks when he stepped into a popular hunting environment. When their case came before the Supreme Court of the 4th District of New York, the courts
denied both the motion and the cross-motion. They agreed that Jacobs had assumed the inherent risks of hunting — just not the risks it would be unreasonable to assume, like getting shot by another hunter who thought you were a turkey. Beyond that, the courts did not pronounce judgment because they did not have enough verifiable facts. Jacobs asserted that turkey hunters should not shoot unless they can see the turkey and verify its gender. The court could not determine whether Kent had failed to follow this rule when he shot Jacobs. They also could not determine whether the doctrine of primary assumption of risk, which Kent pointed to in his defense, was even applicable. The court also called into question whether Jacobs had also been negligent. Ultimately, the case didn’t move forward. Maybe next time, they should just try getting a turkey from the supermarket.
P artner S potlight : M eet C arter E lliott OUR MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CO-COUNSEL Part of being a strong lawyer — and a strong law firm — is knowing when it’s in your clients’ best interests to bring a partner on board whose expertise can supplement your own. Our attorneys at Christmas Law Firm are experts when it comes to personal injury and workers’ compensation cases, but we also recognize the benefits of partnering with other lawyers when working on cases we rarely see come across our desks. One of those lawyers is Carter Elliott, the founder of Elliott Phelan, LLC. His firm specializes in medical malpractice, police misconduct, and jail negligence cases, and he has co-counseled on medical malpractice cases with Gary Christmas for more than a decade. “Gary gets some cases he doesn’t specialize in, something like medical malpractice, and I take the lead on those,” Carter explains. “If I get any workers’ compensation cases and things of that nature, I send them to him, and we work together on them.” It’s a win-win for both firms and for our clients, who get a legal team specifically tailored to their needs.
Carter has been practicing law for 30 years. He knew from a very young age he wanted to be a lawyer, and he worked at four other firms out of law school before opening his own. Carter loves a challenge and focuses on medical malpractice in part because every case is a puzzle that requires a deep dive. “My cases are mostly expert-driven, and that gives us a chance to work with doctors and professionals, research the cases, and then litigate them,” he says. Carter and Gary were friends before they began working together professionally, and the trust formed in those early days has made them an excellent team in the courtroom. If you bring a medical malpractice case to Christmas Law Firm, rest easy knowing that one of South Carolina’s best legal duos is on your side.
To learn more about Elliott Phelan, LLC, visit ElliottPhelanLaw.com or call 843-546-0650.
2
www.ChristmasInjuryLawyers.com
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog