Baker v. Abel

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Baker v. Abel

130 S.W. 999, 140 Ky. 114, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 203

DecidedSeptember 30, 1910

StatusPublished

This text of 130 S.W. 999 (Baker v. Abel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baker v. Abel, 130 S.W. 999, 140 Ky. 114, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 203 (Ky. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Carroll

Affirming.

'The appellant Baker, plaintiff below, brought this action against the appellee, defendant below, to recover damages for an assault and battery committed upon him by appellant. Abel admitted assaulting Baker, but averred that he used no more force than was necessary to defend himself from an attack made upon him at the time by Baker. A few witnesses were introduced by each of the parties in support of their respective contentions, and the jury after being instructed returned a verdict for the defendant. A reversal is asked alone upon the ground that the verdict is flagrantly against the evidence. The evidence is conflicting, but there was sufficient to justify the jury in finding that Abel in assaulting Baker ' used no more force than was necessary to protect himself from an attack made upon him by Baker, and so the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Judge Nunn not sitting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Carroll

Affirming.

'The appellant Baker, plaintiff below, brought this action against the appellee, defendant below, to recover damages for an assault and battery committed upon him by appellant. Abel admitted assaulting Baker, but averred that he used no more force than was necessary to defend himself from an attack made upon him at the time by Baker. A few witnesses were introduced by each of the parties in support of their respective contentions, and the jury after being instructed returned a verdict for the defendant. A reversal is asked alone upon the ground that the verdict is flagrantly against the evidence. The evidence is conflicting, but there was sufficient to justify the jury in finding that Abel in assaulting Baker ' used no more force than was necessary to protect himself from an attack made upon him by Baker, and so the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Judge Nunn not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 S.W. 999, 140 Ky. 114, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-abel-kyctapp-1910.