Legal Opinion

Fields v. Stovall

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 9, 1989No. 88-258PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

The sole point of appeal is the alleged inadequacy of a jury verdict. A car wreck occurred when the appellee, the defendant below, ran a stop sign and struck the appellant’s car. The jury returned a verdict which awarded the full amount of claimed property damage, but only a part of the claimed medical expenses and nothing for lost wages, mental anguish, or future medical expenses. The trial court denied appellant’s motion for a new trial. We affirm the trial court’s ruling.

Under ARCP Rule 59(a)(5), the inadequacy of the recovery can be a ground for a new trial. When…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Warner v. LiebhaberSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  2. Raiborn v. RaibornSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Younts v. Baldor Elec. Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  2. Kempner v. SchulteSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  3. Knoles v. SalazarSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  4. Fritz v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corp.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
  5. Parrish v. NewtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989

1 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