Humphrey v. Dent

Appellant, in his first proposition of law, asks this court to adopt a rule of comparative negligence. This court, in Baab v. Shockling (1980), 61 Ohio St. 2d 55, 57, recently reaffirmed its decision not to judicially alter the law in this area and held that any change in the law should emanate from the General Assembly.2 Accordingly, appellant’s first proposition of law is overruled.

Appellant, in his second proposition of law, asserts, in essence, that the lower court erred by directing a verdict in favor of appellee and determining that appellant was guilty of contributory negligence as a…