Smith v. McMillan
Kentucky Supreme Court
1DissentWintersheimer, Justice
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because the Court of Appeals did not commit reversible error in determining that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in denying a motion for a new trial on the basis of inadequate damages, and the remarks by counsel do not constitute reversible error.
Denial of a new trial on the basis of inadequacy of damages is a matter for the exercise of the sound discretion of the trial judge. The reversal of such a decision by a reviewing court must be undertaken only with great restraint and only in exceptional cases. Aker v. Smith, Ky., 290…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Davidson v. VoglerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1974
- Risen v. PierceKentucky Supreme Court · 1991
- Spalding v. ShinkleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1989
- Carlson v. McElroyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1979
- Aker v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1956