Legal Opinion
Johnson v. Portland Terminal Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided October 14, 1932PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPattangall, C. J.
Exception to the direction of verdict for defendant. Action for damages arising from injuries claimed to have been sustained by reason of defendant’s negligence in operating a shifting train with which plaintiff’s automobile collided on a grade crossing.
A presiding justice at nisi prius is authorized to direct a verdict for either party in any civil case when a contrary verdict could not be sustained by the evidence. Bank v. Sargent, 85 Me., 349, 27 A., 192; Bennett v. Talbot, 90 Me., 229, 38 A., 112; Coleman v. Lord, 96 Me., 192, 52 A., 645. If plaintiff’s evidence, given all of the force to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Smith v. Maine Central RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1895
- Day v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1902
- Market & Fulton National Bank v. SargentSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1893
- McCarthy v. Bangor & Aroostook R. R. Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1914
- Young v. ChandlerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lander v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1945
- Winslow v. TibbettsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1932
- Inhabitants of Town of Lincolnville v. PerrySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
- Olsen v. Portland Water DistrictSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
- Sanborn v. Elmore Milling CompanySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1957
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.