Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corporation (1959)
- Docket
- 6
- Decided
- 1959-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: Should the appellate court limit its review to the reasonableness of an inference or conclusion drawn by a jury? Conclusion: Yes. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. delivered the opinion of the 8-0 majority. The Court held that the testimony of the medical specialists supported the reasonableness of the judgment in favor of Sentilles. The Court noted that the role of the appellate court is not to independently review the evidence, but rather is limited to considering the reasonableness of decisions reached in the lower tribunal. Justice John M. Harlan concurred in the Court’s opinion. Justice Charles E. Whittaker wrote a concurring opinion in which he noted that the record contained evidence that the accident actually caused the tuberculosis. In an opinion concurring in the judgment, Justice Potter Stewart disagreed with the Court’s standard of review and instead reversed the appellate court upon an independent examination of the record. He also argued that the Court should not grant certiorari to cases in which the sufficiency of the evidence is the sole question before the Court. Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote a dissent in which he agreed with Justice Stewart’s conclusion that the Court should not hear these types of cases. Rather than deciding the case, Justice Frankfurter argued that the Court should have dismissed its writ of certiorari after the parties’ oral arguments.