537 SO2D 953 - Hysmith v. Grimes

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2018

9 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

HOLMES, Judge.

¶1The appellants appeal from a jury verdict, contending (1) that the damages awarded were excessive and (2) that certain evidence was inadmissible.

¶2On appeal the appellants first contend that the evidence was insufficient to support the damages awarded by the jury. Unfortunately, however, we cannot review the sufficiency of the evidence at the trial below because the appellants did not move for a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (J.N.O.V.) or seek a new trial. K-Mart Corp. v. Butler, 486 So.2d 426 (Ala.1986). Therefore, the appellants are precluded from raising this issue on appeal.

¶3Further, we need not address the appellants’ second issue pertaining to the admissibility of certain evidence at the trial below. This is so because of the lack of proper authority cited for the appellants’ argument. Lambert v. Pinckard Agency, Inc., 516 So.2d 697 (Ala.Civ.App.1987).

¶4In view of the above, we have no alternative but to affirm the trial court.

¶5This case is due to be affirmed.

¶6AFFIRMED.

BRADLEY, P.J., and INGRAM, J., concur.