Hanley v. Balch
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Frazer, J. Case by George Hanley, for the use and benefit of John T. Ryan, against George W. Balch and others, for alleged conspiracy to wreck a corporation in which Ryan was a stockholder. (See 94 Mich. 315.) From a judgment for defendants upon verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.
The court directed verdict for defendants. The first question is whether a general direction, without giving reason therefor, should be reversed.
This case differs from Demill v. Moffat, 45 Mich. 410, in that it does give a reason, viz., that the evidence will not support a verdict. In that case the court said, ‘‘The defendant is entitled to your verdict.”
In Rayl v. Estate of Hammond, 95 Mich. 22, the court directed a verdict for defendant without giving any reason therefor, or any statement as to the points of law upon which its direction was Jiased. This, it was held, could not be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Demill v. MoffatMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Tillotson v. WebberMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Rayl v. Estate of HammondMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by3 opinions
- Smalley v. Rio Grande Western Ry. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1908
- Turner v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- Parsille v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1915