PHYLLIS W. OWENS AND RICHARD OWENS, HUSBAND AND WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
MARVIN INDUSTRIES, INC., AND WILBERT N. LEE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This case involves an appeal from a summary judgment granted to the defendants in a personal injury lawsuit arising from a car accident. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, agreeing that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent.
No, the trial judge did not err. The record adequately supports the decision that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent and that this negligence proximately caused the accident and her injuries, entitling the defendants to summary judgment as a matter of law.
“finding there was "no genuine issue as to any material fact," and that the plaintiff driver was "guilty of contributory negligence which proximately contributed to or proximately caused the accident and injuries complained of," and the defendants were entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.”
Describes the trial judge's findings when granting summary judgment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePhyllis W. Owens was injured in an automobile accident while driving her car, which was struck by a truck owned by Marvin Industries, Inc. and driven …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Contributory Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant Phyllis W. Owens, who was injured in an automobile accident, sought damages from the appellees Marvin Industries, Inc., and Wilbert N. Lee, the owner and driver of the truck involved in the accident. Her husband, who owned the car she was driving, joined in the suit to recover damages for his separate resultant losses.
The trial judge granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, finding there was “no genuine issue as to any material fact,” and that the plaintiff driver was “guilty of contributory negligence which proximately contributed to or proximately caused the accident and injuries complained of,” and the defendants were entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
We have carefully reviewed the depositions, affidavits and pleadings in this cause, and have considered the briefs and arguments of counsel dealing with the question of the correctness of these holdings of the able trial judge, and conclude as he did that the record adequately supports his decision.
No error having been made to appear, the summary judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
HORTON, C. J., and CARROLL, CHAS., J., concur.
PEARSON, J., dissents.