Legal Opinion

Yeager v. Dunnavan

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1946No. 29991PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMallery, J.

This cause was tried to a jury. It comes to us on appeal from an order of involuntary nonsuit and dismissal, entered upon the defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence at the close of the plaintiffs’ case.

A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, or motion for nonsuit, admits the truth of plaintiffs’ evidence and all inferences that reasonably can be drawn therefrom, and requires that the evidence be interpreted most strongly against the defendant and in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Billingsley v. Rovig-Temple Co., 16 Wn. (2d) 202, 133 P. (2d) 265.

So…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Billingsley v. Rovig-Temple Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Basler v. Sacramento Elec., Gas & Ry.California Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Harding v. Liberty Hospital Corp.California Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Fritz v. HorsfallWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Kershaw v. TilburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Rawlings v. ApodacaArizona Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Barmat v. John and Jane Doe Partners ADArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Malone v. University of Kansas Medical CenterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1976
  4. Gazija v. Nicholas Jerns Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Bonin v. VannamanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1996

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API