Weller, Exrx. v. Worstall

Counsel for plaintiff in error confine themselves to one ground of error in asking a reversal. It is thus expressed in their brief:

“The only contention which we desire to make in this court is that the court erred in his refusal to direct a verdict, first, at the close of the plaintiff’s testimony, and again at the close of the entire case. It is our contention that the facts developed in the trial of the case absolutely failed to show any negligence upon the part of Weller and do not bring it within the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.”

As disclosed by the record, plaintiff introduced evidence…