Carson v. Employers Casualty Company

Supreme Court of Alabama

Carson v. Employers Casualty Company

282 So. 2d 923, 291 Ala. 510, 1973 Ala. LEXIS 1135

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedSeptember 13, 1973

DocketSC 458

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 282 So. 2d 923 (Carson v. Employers Casualty Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carson v. Employers Casualty Company, 282 So. 2d 923, 291 Ala. 510, 1973 Ala. LEXIS 1135 (Ala. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

HEFLIN, Chief Justice.

Petition of Billy E. Carson and Betty Carson for certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Carson et al. v. Employers Casualty Company, 51 Ala. App. 90, 282 So.2d 913.

In denying the writ in this case this court does not desire to be understood as approving or disapproving the language used or the statements of law contained in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. See Cooper v. State, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108.

This court specifically does not wish to be understood as approving any language in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals which could be construed as establishing an appellate presumption in favor of the correctness of the ruling of the trial court on the affirmative charge. It is the established law of this jurisdiction that an appellate court, in considering the propriety of the affirmative charge, reviews the tendencies of the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff regardless of any view of the appellate court as to the weight of the evidence. National Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. Allen, 285 Ala. 551, 234 So.2d 567; Glass v. Davison, 276 Ala. 328, 161 So.2d 811.

Writ denied.

MERRILL, HARWOOD, MADDOX and FAULKNER, JJ., concur.

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

HEFLIN, Chief Justice.

Petition of Billy E. Carson and Betty Carson for certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Carson et al. v. Employers Casualty Company, 51 Ala. App. 90, 282 So.2d 913.

In denying the writ in this case this court does not desire to be understood as approving or disapproving the language used or the statements of law contained in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. See Cooper v. State, 287 Ala. 728, 252 So.2d 108.

This court specifically does not wish to be understood as approving any language in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals which could be construed as establishing an appellate presumption in favor of the correctness of the ruling of the trial court on the affirmative charge. It is the established law of this jurisdiction that an appellate court, in considering the propriety of the affirmative charge, reviews the tendencies of the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff regardless of any view of the appellate court as to the weight of the evidence. National Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. Allen, 285 Ala. 551, 234 So.2d 567; Glass v. Davison, 276 Ala. 328, 161 So.2d 811.

Writ denied.

MERRILL, HARWOOD, MADDOX and FAULKNER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 So. 2d 923, 291 Ala. 510, 1973 Ala. LEXIS 1135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carson-v-employers-casualty-company-ala-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack