Jackson Bridge & Iron Co. v. Lancashire Insurance

This cause is before us upon writ of error, the assignments of error being “(1) that the court erred in directing a verdict for the plaintiff; (2) that the court erred in not directing a verdict for the defendant.” It is said that the assignments are not sufficiently specific, under Cir. Ct. Rule No. 47, and Sup. Ct. Rule No. 11.

In Johnson v. Ballou, 25 Mich. 460, it is said:

“The right to review rests, therefore, on the last paragraph in the third assignment of error, and it is that the judge erred ‘ in directing the said jury to find a verdict in favor of the defendant.’ It is manifest that…