Glas v. Salhoff

There is testimony in the case from which the jury might have found that the defendant owned the building; likewise there is testimony from which the jury could have found that plaintiff owned it. Instead of submitting this question to the jury, the learned trial court directed a verdict for the plaintiff and sent the question of damages only to the jury. This was error. The court evidently labored under the erroneous impression that ownership of the building rested in the plaintiff as matter of law. The record discloses that both plaintiff and defendant regarded the buildings as personal…