Conrad v. Card

Mahoney, J. (dissenting).

We dissent and hold that the judgment entered on the verdict below must be reversed and a new trial held. The majority’s holding that the judgment below must be affirmed because "The jury returned a verdict of no cause of action based on a finding of assumption of the risk” and, further, that they (majority) "cannot say on the instant record that the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence and contrary to law”, is erroneous. We are not herein concerned with a trial wherein an erroneous principle of law was charged and the party against whose interest…