Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington

Fifth Circuit

Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington

337 F.2d 289

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 12, 1964

Docket21297_1

StatusPublished

This text of 337 F.2d 289 (Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington, 337 F.2d 289 (5th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. It was not error for the trial court to overrule the motion for summary judgment. The issue whether appellant’s employee was an agent of appellant acting within the scope of her employment at the time of the collision is a fact question which has been resolved by the jury upon a proper submission of the applicable law to it.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. It was not error for the trial court to overrule the motion for summary judgment. The issue whether appellant’s employee was an agent of appellant acting within the scope of her employment at the time of the collision is a fact question which has been resolved by the jury upon a proper submission of the applicable law to it.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

337 F.2d 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spencer-inc-v-sarah-kendrick-kennington-ca5-1964.