Walker v. Cork

1 Citing case

  1. Sci v. Brown

    770 So. 2d 97 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999)

    They argue that, in view of the award, Donald's statement was prejudicial. The trial court has much discretion in considering a motion for mistrial. Walker v. Cork, 619 So.2d 1336 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993). This court will not reverse a trial court's denial of a motion for mistrial, based on a party's improper statement, unless it appears from the entire record that the statement involved was prejudicial to the complaining party, either as to the result or the amount of damages assessed.