Copeland v. Compton
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
SHRUM, Chief Judge.
Joe and Tracy Copeland (Plaintiffs)1 appeal from an adverse judgment entered pur*380suant to a jury verdict in their damage suit against Amy Nelson2 (Defendant) for her alleged negligent operation of an automobile.
In their first two points, Plaintiffs charge that there was a complete absence of probative facts to support the jury’s verdict that Defendant was not hable and, consequently, the trial court erred and abused its discretion in denying their motion for a new trial on that basis. In their third point, Plaintiffs contend that the trial court committed prejudicial error…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Martin v. City of WashingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- Means v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1977
- Campbell v. KelleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1986
- Boone v. RichardsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1965
- Smith Ex Rel. Smith v. Archbishop of St. Louis Ex Rel. Archdiocese of St. LouisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Chilton v. GordenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
- Turneo Ex Rel. Capra v. City of St. CharlesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1996
- Wright v. LongMissouri Court of Appeals · 1997
- Hutson v. BOT Investment Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1999
- Shields v. FREIGHTLINER OF JOPLIN, INC.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2011
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.