Legal Opinion

Whitney v. Akers

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma

Decided November 22, 1965No. Civ. 65-215PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAUGHERTY, District Judge.

Upon consideration of plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict and for a New Trial, and the response of defendant thereto, together with briefs submitted by both sides, the Court finds that both motions should be denied.

■ With reference to the Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, it is not possible under the evidence to grant same as the evidence was conflicting and in dispute on the issues of liability and injury or damage. The jury has determined the issue of liability against the defendant and this is supported by substantial…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Indamer Corporation v. C. H. CrandonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1954
  2. Hallford v. SchumacherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1958
  3. Burkett v. MoranSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1965
  4. Cooper v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Thomas D. Cundiff v. Virginia Lee WashburnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968
  2. Smedberg v. Detlef's Custodial Service, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  3. Saum v. BonarOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Newsom v. MarkusCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1979
  5. Baker v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1970

3 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