Bagley v. Cleveland Rolling Mill Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York
At Law.
1Opinion of the CourtWallace, J.
If the evidence introduced upon the trial of this case was such that it would have been the duty of the court to set aside a verdict in favor of the defendant as contrary to evidence, if such verdict had been rendered by the jury, then it was the duty *160of the court to direct a verdict for the plaintiffs. Randall v. B. & O. R. Co. 109 U. S. 478; S. C. 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 322; Griggs v. Houston, 104 U. S. 553; Herbert v. Butler, 97 U. S. 319.
The defendant’s motion for a new trial presents the question whether the evidence was such as to require the case to be submitted to the jury according to the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- White v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Reed v. . RandallNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Warren v. StoddartSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Gurney v. Atlantic & Great Western Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Schaffner v. National Supply Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
- Tacoma Coal Co. v. BradleyWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Hubshman v. Louis Keer Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
- Rubin v. SturtevantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1897
- Markle v. StekollSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.