Legal Opinion

Thomas v. Holliday by and Through Holliday

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 25, 1988No. 63821PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPALA, Justice.

The issue tendered for our decision is whether the trial court erred in granting the plaintiff’s motion for new trial on the ground that its assumption-of-risk charge to the jury had been incorrectly given. We answer this question in the negative and hold that the evidence adduced at trial did not warrant an instruction on assumption of risk.

The plaintiff, Donald R. Thomas [Thomas], a security guard for Safeway and an off-duty Lawton police officer, observed the defendant, Daniel D. Holliday [Holli-day], partially eat a pastry in the grocery store and then replace it on a…

2Cases cited61 opinions

  1. Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. Kirkland v. General Motors CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
  3. Halepeska v. Callihan Interests, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
  5. Anderson v. CeccardiOhio Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Graham v. KeuchelSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
  2. Guinn v. Church of Christ of CollinsvilleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
  3. Schmidt v. United StatesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1996
  4. Reddell v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
  5. Byford v. Town of AsherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994

28 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