Rushton Equipment Company, and Clarence Edward Morse v. Christine Vasilion

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit April 15, 1964

Rushton Equipment Company, and Clarence Edward Morse v. Christine Vasilion, 330 F.2d 896 (5th Cir. 1964)

1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5704

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole question is whether there was such substantial evidence that the defendant “wantonly injured the plaintiff” as to justify the submission of that issue to the jury. We agree with the district court that there was. See Roberts v. McCall, 1944, 245 Ala. 359, 17 So.2d 159; Godfrey v. Vinson, 1926, 215 Ala. 166, 110 So. 13.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: RUSHTON EQUIPMENT COMPANY, and Clarence Edward Morse, Appellants, v. Christine VASILION, Appellee
Status: Published