Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

02/24/98 LINDA SPENCER v. JITNEY JUNGLE STORES

LINDA SPENCER, APPELLANT
v.
JITNEY JUNGLE STORES OF AMERICA, INC, APPELLEES AND WALKER & SONS, A MISSISSIPPI GENERAL PARTNERSHIP



DATE OF JUDGMENT: 6/15/95 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JAMES E. GRAVES, JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

EN Banc.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: McMILLIN, P.j., For The Court:

NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY

TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: DAMAGES AWARDED TO PLAINTIFF JAMES SPENCER; MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL, OR ALTERNATIVELY, ADDITUR DENIED AS TO APPELLANT, LINDA SPENCER.

DISPOSITION AFFIRMED - 2/24/98

MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:

CERTIORARI FILED:

MANDATE ISSUED:

I.

Preliminary Discussion

Linda Spencer sought loss of consortium damages that she claimed arose out of an injury her husband, James Spencer, received in a fall at a Jitney Jungle grocery store in Fulton. The store was operated by the defendant, Walker and Sons, and Spencer's suit named both Jitney Jungle of America and Walker and Sons as defendants. Spencer's loss of consortium claim was tried in the Circuit Court of Hinds County in the same proceeding as her husband's tort claim. The jury returned a verdict in favor of James Spencer but declined to award Linda Spencer any amount by way of loss of consortium. Linda Spencer filed a motion with the trial court for a new trial or, in the alternative, an additur; however, the court denied the motion. She then perfected an appeal to this Court, raising as her only issue a claim that the trial court committed an abuse of discretion in failing to grant her post-verdict relief in the form of either an additur or a new trial. Finding no error, we affirm.

II.

The Form of the Verdict

Because James Spencer advanced separate theories of negligence against the two defendants for his injuries, and because his own contributory negligence in the fall was an issue at trial, the jury was given a special form of the verdict. The verdict form required the jury to answer questions regarding findings as to the negligence of all ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.