Skip to main content
· 10/31/2018

Alicia Lei Alumbaugh v. Wackenhut Corporation

Syllabus

After the plaintiff's father was killed by an armed security guard, she filed a wrongful death action against the security guard's employer. The complaint alleged both vicarious and direct liability and sought an award of compensatory and punitive damages. The employer maintained that the guard acted in self-defense. After the first trial, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. But the trial court ordered a new trial based on errors in the calculation of damages. A second jury verdict apportioned the greater proportion of fault to the decedent, resulting in a defense judgment. On appeal, the plaintiff contends that the trial court made numerous errors in the conduct of the second trial. After a thorough review, we conclude that the trial court did not commit reversible error. So we affirm.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that “38 U.S.C. § 5121A . . . provides for substitution in VA proceedings”
  • noting that “38 U.S.C. § 5121A . . . provides for substitution in VA proceedings”
  • “Even if we assume that Mrs. Merritt was the surviving spouse and has therefore properly substituted herself under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(a)(1), that substitution does not itself grant entitlement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Judge W. Neal McBrayer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.