Total Pageviews

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Is Ana out and Larry in - Should we stay or should we go

We apologize in advance for the long blog...

Folks, we understand Berzett has been selling off his property in Limestone county so that he can move to Morgan County?  We are told that Ana is fed up. She is not happy with the mcwb.  We hear she says that if mcwb is still around during the next election she will not run for sheriff.  We promise we will try our best to still be around if that is all it takes.  So the plan is she doesn't run, she's in jail, or just plain fed up or, she just out right quits.  Larry will be all snuggled in his new residence in Morgan County and the next thing you know we have the following:

Larry Berzett
Running for Sheriff of



584 So.2d 799 (1991)
Fred Erdie BERZETT and Larry Berzett v. Eddie BERZETT, as administrator of the Estate of Naomi Park, deceased.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
May 24, 1991.
Rehearing Denied August 2, 1991.

Dan C. Totten of Malone & Totten, Athens, for appellants.
Jimmy Alexander and Linda B. Lloyd of Alexander, Corder & Plunk, Athens, for appellee.

STEAGALL, Justice.
Naomi Park, an incompetent person, by and through her son and next friend, Eddie
[584 So.2d 800]
Berzett, sued Fred Erdie Berzett (her son) and Larry Berzett (Fred's son), claiming $41,509.43 for money had and received. Park also alleged that she had transferred $41,509.43 to Fred and Larry Berzett while she lacked the mental capacity to enter into such a transaction and/or was acting under undue influence exercised by Fred and Larry. After the complaint was filed, Park died intestate and Eddie Berzett was appointed administrator of her estate. On behalf of Park's estate, Eddie Berzett, as administrator, filed an amended complaint substituting himself as the plaintiff.
The case was tried before a jury. At the close of the plaintiff's evidence, defendant Larry Berzett moved for a directed verdict, which was denied. At the close of all the evidence, Larry Berzett again moved for a directed verdict, and it was again denied. The jury returned a verdict against both defendants in the amount of $53,426.17. Both defendants filed a motion for new trial, which was denied. Larry Berzett appeals.1
On November 28, 1986, Fred checked Park out of a hospital in Pulaski, Tennessee, and brought her to Athens, Alabama, to live with him. Fred lived in a house owned by his son, Larry. On December 1, 1986, Fred took Park to Pulaski to withdraw her money from two banks. Fred was with Park when she withdraw $14,464.72 from the Union Bank in Pulaski; the teller put the $14,464.72 in cash into a money pouch and handed it to Fred, who put the money in his pocket. Fred was also with Park when she withdrew $27,044.71 from First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Giles County; he was given a check in the amount of $27,044.71 made payable to Park. After Fred and Park returned to Fred's home in Athens, Fred had Park endorse the $27,044.71 check. Larry then endorsed the check, cashed it at the First Alabama Bank of Athens, and took the cash to Fred and Park. Park gave $8,000 to Fred to be used to pay for an addition to the house she was living in, which belonged to Larry. Park lived with Fred until June 1987, when she went to live with her niece, Norma Jean Goddard. Goddard testified that Park had no money at the time she left Fred's home.
On appeal, Larry argues 1) that there is no evidence of a transfer of funds from Park to Larry and, therefore, that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his motions for directed verdict and his motion for new trial; and 2) that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that Park had transferred funds to Larry.
At the close of the trial court's instructions to the jury, the defendants objected to the instructions in the following colloquy:
Mr. Totten: Your Honor, on behalf of the Defendants, I would object to that portion of the charge that concerns the elements of undue influence and incapacity of Naomi Park, and allege that the Court continually referred to the transfer of funds in this case without instructing the jury that the jury first must find that such a transfer did indeed occur, and I would ask Your Honor to further instruct the jury that prior to taking up the capacity of Naomi Park or whether or not she acted under undue influence, the jury should first determine whether or not such a transfer did indeed occur.The Court: Well, I thought that was undisputed.Mr. Totten: Of the eight thousand dollars it is, Judge.
Larry conceded that there was evidence of a transfer of $8,000. He did not raise a question of the excessiveness of the damages in his motion for new trial, nor does he raise that question on appeal. See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Robbins,541 So.2d 477 (Ala.1989). This Court, therefore, is compelled to hold that the trial court correctly denied Larry's motions for directed verdict and his motion for new trial.
[584 So.2d 801]
Under Rule 51, A.R.Civ.P., reversible error occurs only when the error appears prejudicial, when viewing the jury instruction in its entirety. Hargress v. City of Montgomery, 479 So.2d 1137 (Ala. 1985). Viewing the trial court's jury instruction in its entirety, this Court finds no reversible error.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
HORNSBY, C.J., and ALMON, ADAMS and INGRAM, JJ., concur.
We need a strong sheriff who is willing to make changes within the office, treat the clerks with respect, train and educate the corrections officers, get Larry Berzett out of the day to day management of the corrections officers, restore Bradley's duties to manage not only the inmates but the corrections officers, ensure the deputies have adequate safety gear, body and dash cam protection, training and education, up to date vehicles with all the bells and whistles, transfer those big trucks the thugamuffins drive to the deputies instead of using them for your horse and pony show, allow the chief deputy the opportunity to come to work and do his job instead of going to the Arab cattle barn on Tuesdays (yes folks, Corley is now going to the Arab cattle barn because he did not like his picture being taken at the Cullman cattle barn.  We decided to watch Corley on a Tuesday morning and found out that he drove his vehicle to the maintenance shop.  Corley dropped his truck off and drove away in what looked like a truck that we often see at the vehicle repair shop.  Ok! we think is getting repairs done to his big new truck so he swaps his truck off an uses a maintenance truck until his truck is ready.  Nope! That did not happen.  When Corley pulls out he goes the opposite direction to the Sheriff's office.  Now we are interested.  We follow Corley to Marshall County.  Ok! Now we think he is going to a meeting with a Marshall County Sheriff's Office.  Nope he stays on 231 South until he come to none other than the Arab cattle sale.) as for Livingston, find the weapons that are unaccounted for under his watch.  We missed a few folks like Captain Belli.  Why hasn't Belli taken corrective actions against Joey Coburn?

1 comment: