Marshall v. Gibson
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellants posit two issues for review. Appellants raise the issues of whether, based on the record, negligence was established as a matter of law and whether the jury’s verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. In considering these issues, this court has, of necessity, carefully reviewed the entire record of this case. Based on this *12review, this court finds that the judgment rendered below must be reversed on the grounds that the trial judge committed prejudicial error in refusing to instruct the jury on comparative negligence and we accordingly remand this case for a new…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Simko v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 1938
3Cited by116 opinions
- Groob v. KeyBankOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Sharp v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. Harry, Ca2008-01-013 (12-8-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
- Jaworowski v. Medical Radiation ConsultantsOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
- Sharp v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
111 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.