Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Cecil Leathers and Julia Leathers, His Wife v. General Motors Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided June 14, 1976No. 74-1392Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWidener, Circuit Judge

I concur with that portion of the court’s opinion affirming the district court’s denial of General Motors’ motion for directed verdict; however, I respectfully dissent from that portion which reverses because of improper argument to the jury.

*1087During closing argument, Leathers’ attorney stated:

“I don’t know, again, how to put a number on that. It’s the loss of the use of your legs, to some extent, the loss of doing sports or hobbies which are athletic, the general limitation in your enjoyment of life, pain, further medical treatment over a period of 26.9 years. 26.9 years are a lot of years,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Har-Pen Truck Lines, Inc. v. Frederick Allen Mills, IIICourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
  2. P. Lorillard Co. v. ClaySupreme Court of Virginia · 1920
  3. White v. BarnesSupreme Court of Virginia · 1924
  4. Norman Klotz v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1959
  5. Ralph Seymour & Burford Buick Corp. v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1953

8 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