Legal Opinion

Canterbury Electric Co. v. Price

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 27, 1989No. 88-1214PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We granted certiorari in this case to review an alleged conflict in the holding of the Court of Civil Appeals and prior holdings of this Court and the Court of Civil Appeals. The alleged conflict arises out of the following language in the Court of Civil Appeals’ opinion:

“As concerns the 67% loss of ability to earn, we point out that the determination of a percentage of permanent partial disability is for the trial court to determine from all the evidence before it. Gibson v. Southern Stone Co., 518 So.2d 730 (Ala.Civ.App.1987). Further, we note that post-injury earnings are but one factor…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v. DowneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1957
  2. Lankford v. INTERN. PAPER CO.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1984
  3. Jim Walter Resources, Inc. v. HallCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1987
  4. Gibson v. Southern Stone Co., Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Russell v. BEECH AEROSPACE SERVICESCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1992
  2. Marley Erectors, Inc. v. RiceCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1991
  3. Brown v. Champion Intern. Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API