Forman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America
Michigan Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceBowles, J.
Mr. Justice Wiest writes, “The motion for judgment non obstante veredicto after verdict and judgment thereon for defendant was improper,” citing authority. I agree that this is a correct statement of the law .as applied to the instant case. To prevent misunderstanding, however, this statement should be qualified inasmuch as it applies only in case there has not been a motion made for a directed verdict with decision thereon reserved by the court under the Empson act. Where motion for directed verdict has been made in a jury trial and the court has reserved decision thereon under the Empson…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kintz v. GalvinMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Sheltrown v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Raridan v. BickMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Strausser v. Sovereign Camp of the Woodmen of the WorldMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Freedman v. BurtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.