Garland v. Wilcox

I am unable to concur with the majority upon the proposition that the trial court was in error in granting the defendant’s motion for a judgment non obstante veredicto.

I think it must be conceded the majority opinion is grounded upon the assumption there is substantial evidence that the defendant Wilcox observed the approach of the Garland car in which the plaintiff was riding when he was 600 feet distant therefrom and that therefore a jury might find he failed to do that which a reasonably prudent person would have done under the same or similar circumstances.

This assumption, in my mind, is…