The opinion
On Petition to Rehear.
The Murphy Truck Lines has filed its petition to rehear in this case complaining:
“We present that the Court has neither considered nor adjudicated the question whether the award by the Court of Appeals of $20,000.00 to parents, found guilty of negligence contributing to the death of their 6% year old child, is excessive, and whether such Court adopted improper criteria in arriving at such figure.”
We think the counsel is mistaken in the foregoing insistence, since the original opinion discusses every issue made on this appeal. We not only considered every fact and the ruling of the Court of Appeals as disclosed in the majority opinion of the court, but gave due consideration to the thoughtful dissenting opinion of Judge Avery.
*424 The petition to rehear is a review and reargument of cases which were considered in the original opinion, except possibly Management Services v. Hellman, 40 Tenn. App. 127 , 289 S.W. 2d 711 . However, this case was cited in the briefs of both the petitioner and the respondents. It was duly considered, although not distinguished by us from other cases which we thought controlling.
Eesponding to the argument of counsel that the final award in the case at bar is grossly excessive when compared to an award in Cheek v. Fox, 7 Tenn.Civ.App. 160; and Koehn v. Hooper, 193 Tenn. 417 , 246 S.W. 2d 68 , we cannot consider the facts appearing in those and other cases as persuasive on the question of contributory negi-gence in the case at bar and what amount should be deducted from the amount of damages the plaintiff would otherwise be entitled to recover and thus decide the ease.
We feel that every material issue in the case was given full, fair and impartial consideration by the Court, and the petition for rehearing should be denied. It is so ordered.