TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

City of Marion v. Flanary

CITY OF MARION v. Mrs. Effie FLANARY

City of Marion v. Flanary, 324 S.W.2d 803 (Ky. Ct. App. 1959)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · State Appellate Courts
Decided
May 22, 1959
Citations
324 S.W.2d 8031959 Ky. LEXIS 377

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Mrs. Effie Flanary recovered a judgment against the City of Marion for $500 damages for personal injuries and doctor and hospital expenses incurred by reason of a fall sustained when she stepped into a hole in a sidewalk.

The evidence was sufficient to submit the questions of negligence and contributory negligence to the jury and to support its verdict.

It was not error to admit the testimony of the plaintiff’s husband that he had paid $200 in doctor and hospital bills and to submit the right of the plaintiff to recover the same, since legal liability of the wrongdoer to pay such expenses rests upon the ground that they were rendered necessary by the defendant’s act and not upon the ground that they have been paid. The defendant cannot take advantage of the fact that these expenses had been paid for the plaintiff by her husband. 25 C.J. S.Damages § 91; 15 Am.Jur., Damages, §§ 148, 199.

The motion for an appeal is overruled and the judgment stands affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1967: 11986: 12020: 119672026peak 1967 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Patusco v. Prince MacAroni, Inc.235 A.2d 465 (N.J. 1967)
  2. Philip Chang & Sons Associates v. La Casa Novato177 Cal. App. 3d 159 (1986)
  3. San Joaquin Valley Insurance Authority v. Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc.No. 1:17-cv-00861 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2020)

Most recent

  1. San Joaquin Valley Insurance Authority v. Gallagher Benefit Services, Inc.No. 1:17-cv-00861 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2020)
  2. Philip Chang & Sons Associates v. La Casa Novato177 Cal. App. 3d 159 (1986)
  3. Patusco v. Prince MacAroni, Inc.235 A.2d 465 (N.J. 1967)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list