Legal Opinion

Nickell v. Gonzalez

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 1985No. 84-650PublishedCited by 99 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.

The issue before us is whether the judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“j.n.o.v.”) was properly granted by the trial court judge in favor of the plaintiffs. For the reasons set forth below we find that the j.n.o.v. was erroneously granted and affirm the decision of the court of appeals.

The standard for granting a motion for j.n.o.v. is the same as that necessary to sustain a motion for a directed verdict. Agers v. Woodard (1957), 166 Ohio St. 138 [1 O.O.2d 377], at paragraph one of the syllabus. As we set forth in Posin v. A.B.C. Motor Court Hotel (1976), 45 Ohio St. 2d 271, 275 [74 O.O.2d…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bruni v. TatsumiOhio Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Posin v. A. B. C. Motor Court Hotel, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Sard v. HardyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  4. Congrove v. HolmesRoss County Court of Common Pleas · 1973
  5. Siegel v. Mt. Sinai HospitalOhio Court of Appeals · 1978

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

3Cited by99 opinions

  1. Miller v. PaulsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1994
  2. Sherwood v. CarterIdaho Supreme Court · 1991
  3. White v. LeimbachOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Pauscher v. Iowa Methodist Medical CenterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1987
  5. Christian Lewis v. Sheila D. MooreCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018

94 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