Legal Opinion

Ginn ex rel. Ginn v. Myrick

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

Decided October 5, 1905Published

1Opinion of the CourtHoefheimer, J.

Ruling on motion for judgment.

The suction was for damages for personal injury. At the conclusion- of the evidence, defendants filed ia -written request ■to direct the jury to return a special vendiet in writing upon all the issues in the case. The motion was granted under the statutes, and the court instructed the jury accordingly.

The petition in substance averred that plaintiff ivas hurt while operating a dangerous machine, which defendants negligently failed to guard, and that plaintiff was young and of im*449mature years, and that the accident was without fault on her piart. The answer was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. DunleavyIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Brazil Block Coal Co. v. HoodletIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne, & Chicago Railway Co. v. RubyIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Whitworth v. BallardIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Beasley v. PhillipsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898

1 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