Donald v. Mathews

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Donald v. Mathews

671 So. 2d 747, 1995 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 704, 1995 WL 705306

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedDecember 1, 1995

Docket2940512

StatusPublished

This text of 671 So. 2d 747 (Donald v. Mathews) 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

Donald v. Mathews, 671 So. 2d 747, 1995 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 704, 1995 WL 705306 (Ala. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

THIGPEN, Judge.

At issue in this case is whether a trial court erred in failing to strike a prospective juror in a negligence case for cause, on the grounds that she was at one time related by marriage to the defendant in the case. Donald, one of the plaintiffs, is appealing irom a judgment based on a jury verdict in her favor, alleging that she was awarded insufficient damages.

“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 has timely filed a motion for a new trial which was overruled by the trial court.”

Cleveland v. Gilbert, 473 So;2d 1075, 1076 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). The record reveals that [748]*748Donald did not move for a new trial after judgment was entered. This court’s error-correcting function prohibits consideration of any potential merits to the appellant’s contentions. It is fundamental that an appellate court will not “put a trial court in error for failure to rule on a matter which, according to the record, was not presented to nor decided by it.” Bevill v. Owen, 364 So.2d 1201, 1203 (Ala.1979). See also Sea Calm Shipping Co., S.A. v. Cooks, 565 So.2d 212 (Ala.1990). There is nothing properly presented for this Court to review. Consequently, the judgment of the trial court is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTSON, P.J., and YATES, MONROE, and CRAWLEY, JJ., concur.

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

THIGPEN, Judge.

At issue in this case is whether a trial court erred in failing to strike a prospective juror in a negligence case for cause, on the grounds that she was at one time related by marriage to the defendant in the case. Donald, one of the plaintiffs, is appealing irom a judgment based on a jury verdict in her favor, alleging that she was awarded insufficient damages.

“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 has timely filed a motion for a new trial which was overruled by the trial court.”

Cleveland v. Gilbert, 473 So;2d 1075, 1076 (Ala.Civ.App.1985). The record reveals that [748]*748Donald did not move for a new trial after judgment was entered. This court’s error-correcting function prohibits consideration of any potential merits to the appellant’s contentions. It is fundamental that an appellate court will not “put a trial court in error for failure to rule on a matter which, according to the record, was not presented to nor decided by it.” Bevill v. Owen, 364 So.2d 1201, 1203 (Ala.1979). See also Sea Calm Shipping Co., S.A. v. Cooks, 565 So.2d 212 (Ala.1990). There is nothing properly presented for this Court to review. Consequently, the judgment of the trial court is due to be, and it is hereby, affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTSON, P.J., and YATES, MONROE, and CRAWLEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

671 So. 2d 747, 1995 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 704, 1995 WL 705306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-v-mathews-alacivapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack