Legal Opinion · Dissent

Steen v. Polyclinic

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 5, 1938No. 26357. En BancPublished

1DissentMillard, J.

(dissenting) — The trial court erred in granting judgment in favor of the defendant notwithstanding the verdict for the plaintiffs.

“A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict involves no element of discretion, and should not be granted unless it can be said, as a matter of law, that there is neither evidence nor reasonable inference from evidence to sustain the verdict.” Hart v. Hogan, 173 Wash. 598, 24 P. (2d) 99.

“It is a settled rule that a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict calls for the exercise of no discretion on the part of the court, and can only be granted when…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Hart v. HoganWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Helland v. BridenstineWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Dahl v. WagnerWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Cornwell v. SleicherWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Howatt v. CartwrightWashington Supreme Court · 1924

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API