Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Woods

It is claimed by appellant, in substance, first, that the court erred in not directing a verdict for defendant at the close of the plaintiff’s case, and also at the close of all the evidence; second, that the jury was erroneously instructed; and, third, that the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence- and is excessive.

It is said that as under the declaration defendant is charged with having negligently constructed and maintained its elevator cage, and as there is no evidence to prove the negligent original construction of the elevator cage, the plaintiff’s case must fail for that…