Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Edith A. Mills v. Pearl M. Mealey, Mary Lee Rinehart, a Co-Partnership, T/a R & M Trucking Co., Gate City Transport Company, and Cleveland Ray Worley, 11896 (1968)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 11896 Visitors: 9
Filed: May 03, 1968
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 393 F.2d 934 Edith A. MILLS, Appellant, v. Pearl M. MEALEY, Mary Lee Rinehart, a co-partnership, t/a R & M Trucking Co., Gate City Transport Company, and Cleveland Ray Worley, Appellees. No. 11896. United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit. Argued March 6, 1968. Decided May 3, 1968. Ralph Masinter, Roanoke, Va. (Masinter & Masinter, Roanoke, Va., on brief), for appellant. William B. Poff and Talfourd H. Kemper, Roanoke, Va. (Woods, Rogers, Muse, Walker & Thornton, Roanoke, Va., on brief), fo
More

393 F.2d 934

Edith A. MILLS, Appellant,
v.
Pearl M. MEALEY, Mary Lee Rinehart, a co-partnership, t/a R
& M Trucking Co., Gate City Transport Company, and
Cleveland Ray Worley, Appellees.

No. 11896.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued March 6, 1968.
Decided May 3, 1968.

Ralph Masinter, Roanoke, Va. (Masinter & Masinter, Roanoke, Va., on brief), for appellant.

William B. Poff and Talfourd H. Kemper, Roanoke, Va. (Woods, Rogers, Muse, Walker & Thornton, Roanoke, Va., on brief), for appellees.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, WINTER, Circuit Judge, and RUSSELL, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

In this appeal in an automobile accident case, the appellant tenders principally factual issues foreclosed by the verdict of the jury. That those issues were appropriate for the jury's resolution and that they were submitted under full and proper instructions clearly appears from the opinion of the District Court on the motion for a new trial.1

2

Affirmed.

1

Mills v. Mealey, W.D.Va., 274 F. Supp. 4

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer