Mauermann v. Dixon

The appellants contend: (1) That the judgment should be reversed with directions to enter judgment in their favor because the evidence was insufficient to make a jury question as to the negligence of Davis, and that, if not entitled to such relief, (2) that the verdict should be set aside and a new trial ordered on the ground that the verdict is perverse.(1) We consider that the findings of the jury as to the negligence of Davis in respect to speed, position on the road at the time of the collision, and control of her car are supported by the evidence, however it may be as to the other items…