GORDON L. PERRYMAN AND EDNA H. PERRYMAN, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
LAWRENCE RONALD WARRICK, APPELLEE
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 jury verdict in an intersection automobile collision lawsuit. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment, finding no reversible error in the jury instructions.
No, the trial court did not commit reversible error regarding the jury instructions.
“The appeal is from the judgment entered consequent upon a jury verdict rendered in favor of defendant.”
Describes the procedural posture of the case and the outcome below.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs Gordon L. Perryman and Edna H. Perryman sued defendant Lawrence Ronald Warrick following an intersection automobile collision. A jury retur…
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.
An intersection automobile collision gave rise to the suit entered below by plaintiffs, Gordon L. Perryman and Edna H. Perry-man, his wife, appellants, against Lawrence Ronald Warrick, defendant-appellee. The appeal is from the judgment entered consequent upon a jury verdict rendered in favor of defendant.
Sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s verdict is not challenged, but the protest of appellants is directed against the trial court’s rulings as to three jury instructions. One of these, given by the court, is complained of as having been inadequate; as to the other two, requested by appellants and rejected by the court, appellants contend that they should have been given.
We have studied the whole record, including all of the instructions, and do not find that reversible error has been committed. The judgment, therefore, is affirmed.
Affirmed.
KANNER, Acting C. J., and ALLEN and WHITE, JJ., concur.