Hamill v. Smith
Audry Hamill claims that she was injured when Melanie Smiths car struck the rear end of the car in which she was riding. The trial court directed a verdict on the issue of whether Smith was negligent and as a result caused harm to Hamill. Smith claimed that there was very little injury to the Hamill car and that Hamills claims of injury and expenses for medical treatment were excessive and unnecessary. Hamill asserts that the trial court erred when it refused to continue the trial in order to allow her to investigate a recent medical report regarding her condition. In addition, Hamill asserts that the jury verdict for her medical expenses was inadequate as a matter of law. Court find no trial court error and confirm the judgment of the jury.
Comments on Hamill v. Smith