Legal Opinion

Fitzwater v. Cincinnati, Newport & Covington R.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided October 27, 1950Published

1Opinion of the Court

Judge Latimer

Affirming.

Two separate actions are involved in this appeal. Pearl Fitzwater in her action sought to recover from appellee for permanent injuries. Her husband, William Fitzwater, in his action sought recovery for loss of consortium and expenses. The causes were tried together, resulting in verdict for appellee.

Motion and grounds for new trial were filed in each case. In the wife’s case the grounds for new trial were: (1) The verdict is contrary to the law and evidence. (2) The court erred in instructions as given. In the husband’s case the ground was merely the verdict is contrary…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lyons v. Southeastern Greyhound LinesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1940
  2. Wilder v. Louisville Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  3. Louisville Railway Co. v. OsborneCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  4. Louisville Railway Co. v. WilderCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
  5. South Covington & Cincinnati Street Railway Co. v. TrowbridgeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915

5 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