Cleveland v. Gilbert

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Cleveland v. Gilbert

473 So. 2d 1075

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedMay 8, 1985

DocketCiv. 4648

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 473 So. 2d 1075 (Cleveland v. Gilbert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cleveland v. Gilbert, 473 So. 2d 1075 (Ala. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Richard Cleveland and his father sued Abbie Cleo Gilbert as executrix of her husband's estate, based on injuries resulting from an automobile crash. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Cleveland for $4,000 and in favor of his father for $450. Cleveland appeals.

Cleveland appeals only on the basis of evidentiary error in the trial court. The law in Alabama is well settled that the party who prevailed in the trial court can appeal only on the issue of the adequacy of the damages awarded him, and the appeal can be brought only after he timely filed a motion for new trial which was overruled by the trial court. Prescott v. Fletcher,379 So.2d 333 (Ala.Civ.App. 1979), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 334 (Ala. 1980).See also, Stinson v. Acme Propane Gas Co., 391 So.2d 659 (Ala. 1980); Fallaw v. Flowers, 274 Ala. 151, 146 So.2d 306 (1962). Cleveland did not base his appeal on the adequacy of damages, nor did he even ask the trial court for a new trial. No issue having been presented to this court for decision, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

WRIGHT, P.J., and HOLMES, J., concur.

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

Richard Cleveland and his father sued Abbie Cleo Gilbert as executrix of her husband's estate, based on injuries resulting from an automobile crash. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Cleveland for $4,000 and in favor of his father for $450. Cleveland appeals.

Cleveland appeals only on the basis of evidentiary error in the trial court. The law in Alabama is well settled that the party who prevailed in the trial court can appeal only on the issue of the adequacy of the damages awarded him, and the appeal can be brought only after he timely filed a motion for new trial which was overruled by the trial court. Prescott v. Fletcher,379 So.2d 333 (Ala.Civ.App. 1979), cert. denied, 379 So.2d 334 (Ala. 1980).See also, Stinson v. Acme Propane Gas Co., 391 So.2d 659 (Ala. 1980); Fallaw v. Flowers, 274 Ala. 151, 146 So.2d 306 (1962). Cleveland did not base his appeal on the adequacy of damages, nor did he even ask the trial court for a new trial. No issue having been presented to this court for decision, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

WRIGHT, P.J., and HOLMES, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

473 So. 2d 1075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cleveland-v-gilbert-alacivapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack