Legal Opinion

Vanoven v. Hardin

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 20, 1961No. 5-2322PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Paul Ward, Associate Justice.

This litigation was instituted by appellants to recover damages for having contracted dermatitis while chopping cotton which had been sprayed with an insecticide. At the close of the testimony by both sides the trial court instructed a verdict in favor of appellee on the ground that there was “no substantial evidence in the record upon which the jury could base a verdict, or finding of negligence, upon the part of the defendant . . . which was a proximate cause of the injuries complained of by plaintiffs.” Appellants now prosecute this appeal to reverse the trial…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Florence Wright and Roy Wright v. Carter Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
  2. Nina Merrill v. Beaute Vues Corporation, a Corporation and Waval Thermal Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1956
  3. Harmon v. WardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
  4. Franke's, Incorporated v. BennettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
  5. Cockerham v. BarnesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1959

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Magee v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1963
  2. Rhoads v. Service MacHine CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1971
  3. Friedman v. Merck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 2003
  4. Beverly O'Hare v. Merck & Company, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation, Also Known as Merck, Sharp & DohmeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
  5. Friedman v. Merck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 2003

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API