Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington

Fifth Circuit

Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington

337 F.2d 289

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 12, 1964·No. 21297_1·Published

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.

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

Pincite

337 F.2d 289 (Spencer, Inc. v. Sarah Kendrick Kennington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.