Reed v. Short

Richards, C. J.:

It is contended on behalf of the plaintiff that the defendant is not entitled to be heard on his reasons based upon the Court’s refusal to grant his motion for a non suit, because said motion for a non suit was not renewed before the close of the case in form of a motion for a directed verdict, relying upon Lewes Sand Co. v. Graves, 1 Terry 189, 8 A. 2d 21, and Emerson v. Universal Products Co., 6 W. W. Harr. 543, 546, 179 A. 383. I agree with the principle which these cases stand for, and if the refusal to grant defendant’s motion for non suit was the only reason relied upon…