Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Alvin L. Jones v. Payless Stations, Inc., and George W. Parris, Sr., 14305_1 (1961)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Number: 14305_1 Visitors: 30
Filed: Apr. 13, 1961
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 289 F.2d 492 Alvin L. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PAYLESS STATIONS, INC., and George W. Parris, Sr., Defendants-Appellants. No. 14305. United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit. April 13, 1961. Eugene B. Cochran, Louisville, Ky., O. Grant Bruton, Middleton, Seelbach, Wolford, Willis & Cochran, Louisville, Ky., on brief, for appellants. Richard C. Oldham, Louisville, Ky., Clinton R. Burroughs, Louisville, Ky., on brief, for appellee. Before MARTIN, CECIL and WEICK, Circuit Judges. ORDER. 1 T
More

289 F.2d 492

Alvin L. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
PAYLESS STATIONS, INC., and George W. Parris, Sr., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 14305.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

April 13, 1961.

Eugene B. Cochran, Louisville, Ky., O. Grant Bruton, Middleton, Seelbach, Wolford, Willis & Cochran, Louisville, Ky., on brief, for appellants.

Richard C. Oldham, Louisville, Ky., Clinton R. Burroughs, Louisville, Ky., on brief, for appellee.

Before MARTIN, CECIL and WEICK, Circuit Judges.

ORDER.

1

This is an appeal from the United States District Court, for the Western District of Kentucky. The plaintiff-appellee recovered a judgment in said court in the sum of $25,000 against the defendants-appellants.

2

Upon consideration of the record, the oral arguments and briefs of counsel, the Court finds that the question of negligence of George Parris was properly submitted to the jury; that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's finding of negligence against the defendants-appellants and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury to the plaintiff-appellee; the Court further finds that the plaintiff-appellee was not guilty of negligence as a matter of law and that the finding of the jury that there was no negligence on the part of the plaintiff-appellee, which contributed to his injury, is not contrary to the weight of the evidence. And the Court finds further that there is no merit to the claim of the defendants-appellants that the Ohio Casualty Insurance Company should have been made a party to the action.

3

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the District Court be and it is hereby affirmed.

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