Czelzewicz v. Turansky

The plaintiff brought this action to recover for damages to his motor vehicle, alleged to have been sustained as a result of the negligence of the defendant. The court rendered judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed, claiming the court erred (1) in applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, (2) in failing to correct the finding by adding facts which were admitted or undisputed, *568(3) in that the conclusions are not supported by the subordinate facts, and (4) in refusing to grant the defendant’s motion to dismiss the case.1 The defendant has not briefed his second assignment…