Flynn v. Sharon Steel Corp.

In the consideration of this case it should be noted at the outset that the defendant, appellant herein, offered no evidence as to car No. 132, its loading or the manner of plaintiff’s injury. Its evidence was confined to the introduction of the rule of the railroad company set forth in its answer, the nature and extent of plaintiff’s injuries, and the release.

We- shall consider and determine the assignments of error presented in the chronological order as stated in the brief of appellant.

Assignment 1. “The Common Pleas Court erred in overruling the defendant’s motion to arrest the testimony…