Kellerman v. J. S. Durig Co. Kellerman v. J. S. Durig Co.

Kellerman v. J. S. Durig Co‪.‬

176 Ohio St. 320, 199 N.E.2d 562, OH.40174(1964)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

ZIMMERMAN, J. An established principle of law is that ""in the face of a motion to direct the jury to return a verdict for one of the parties to an action, which in effect is a demurrer to the evidence, the court must construe the evidence most strongly in favor of the party against whom the motion is made, and, where there is substantial competent evidence to support his side of the case, upon which reasonable minds may reach different conclusions, the motion must be denied. Neither the weight of the evidence nor the credibility of the witnesses is for the court's determination in disposing of such a motion."" Durham v. Warner Elevator Mfg. Co., 166 Ohio St., 31, 36, 139 N. E. (2d), 10, 14. ""Every material fact which such evidence tends to prove will be taken as established."" Burrow, Admx., v. Porterfield, Admr., 171 Ohio St., 28, 30, 168 N. E. (2d), 137, 140.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1964
3 June
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
6
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
56
KB

More Books by The Supreme Court of the State of Ohio

Franchise Developers, Inc. v. Cincinnati Franchise Developers, Inc. v. Cincinnati
1987
Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Antonelli Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Antonelli
1987
Pitts v. Cincinnati Met. Housing Auth. Pitts v. Cincinnati Met. Housing Auth.
1953
In re Pottery In re Pottery
1954
State Ex Rel Sanor Sawmill, Inc. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio State Ex Rel Sanor Sawmill, Inc. v. Industrial Commission of Ohio
2004
State v. Doe State v. Doe
2004