Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. McMillan

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1992No. 92-SC-028-DGPublished

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

  1. Davidson v. VoglerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1974
  2. Risen v. PierceKentucky Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Spalding v. ShinkleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1989
  4. Carlson v. McElroyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1979
  5. Aker v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1956

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API