Legal Opinion

Hale v. Rayburn

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Decided September 11, 1953PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHoward, J.

Referring to the parties as they appeared below, the plaintiff, Joe B. Rayburn, defendant-in-error here, admits that the pleadings are correctly stated in the defendant’s brief, as follows:

“This suit was brought in the Circuit Court of McMinn County by the plaintiff, as the father of Lilly Ruth Rayburn, age seventeen, to recover damages for her death, when she was struck, while crossing the highway, by an automobile driven by the defendant, Louie 0. Hale.
“The declaration alleges that the plaintiff’s daughter, Lilly Ruth Rayburn, was standing on the southeast side of Federal Highway No. 11, ‘a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Jackson v. B. Lowenstein Bros., Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Southeastern Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. GrovesTennessee Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Campbell v. Campbell Et Ux.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1946
  4. Fields v. GordonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1947
  5. McBroom v. S. E. Greyhound LinesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1945

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. McCall v. WilderTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Street v. CalvertTennessee Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Frady v. SmithTennessee Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Harvey v. WheelerCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1967
  5. Hickman v. JordanCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2001

17 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