Harris v. Purity Baking Co.

Supreme Court of Virginia

Harris v. Purity Baking Co.

181 S.E.2d 486, 212 Va. 10, 1971 Va. LEXIS 278

CourtSupreme Court of Virginia

DecidedJune 14, 1971

DocketRecord No. 7492

StatusPublished

This text of 181 S.E.2d 486 (Harris v. Purity Baking Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harris v. Purity Baking Co., 181 S.E.2d 486, 212 Va. 10, 1971 Va. LEXIS 278 (Va. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Jerrell Ray Harris brought this action against Purity Baking Company (“Purity”) alleging that Purity’s negligence was a proximate cause of personal injuries sustained by a third party and that Harris had compensated the third party for his injuries. Harris sought judgment for one-half of the amount paid by him to the third party. The court set aside a jury verdict for Harris on the ground that Harris’s negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident resulting in the third party’s injuries. The trial court then entered judgment for Purity, and Harris appeals.

Counsel agree that this appeal presents no issue of law but only an issue of fact. In our opinion the evidence supports the jury’s verdict for Harris. We therefore reverse the judgment and enter judgment for Harris on the verdict.

Reversed and final judgment.

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

Per Curiam.

Jerrell Ray Harris brought this action against Purity Baking Company (“Purity”) alleging that Purity’s negligence was a proximate cause of personal injuries sustained by a third party and that Harris had compensated the third party for his injuries. Harris sought judgment for one-half of the amount paid by him to the third party. The court set aside a jury verdict for Harris on the ground that Harris’s negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident resulting in the third party’s injuries. The trial court then entered judgment for Purity, and Harris appeals.

Counsel agree that this appeal presents no issue of law but only an issue of fact. In our opinion the evidence supports the jury’s verdict for Harris. We therefore reverse the judgment and enter judgment for Harris on the verdict.

Reversed and final judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 S.E.2d 486, 212 Va. 10, 1971 Va. LEXIS 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-purity-baking-co-va-1971.