Gurly v. Hinson

How courts have described this case

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

• where the “evidence on the consortium issue was not uncontradicted,” “the jury awarded the appellant wife a small amofint over the documented special damages,” (emphasis supplied
• \This court does recognize the rule that a consortium action is derivative and ... a jury cannot render inconsistent verdicts\ — vis-a'-vis the loss of consortium and the personal injury claims.
• any error in trial court prohibiting plaintiff from asking defendant about an insurance claim form was harmless where question was relevant to liability and verdict was rendered for the plaintiff

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).