Smith v. Durst

OPINION

By BACON, J.

Plaintiff asks a new trial following a directed verdict for defendant. His argument citing “sudden entrance of discernible object into lane of traffic” line of cases does not shake this court’s conclusion that plaintiff indisputably violated the “assured clear distance” requirement of Ohio’s Traffic Code.

The facts are almost uncontradicted. Plaintiff testified in substance as in his deposition made a few months ago.

*564“I was going to work and was on Route 124 coming to Ravenswood. It was raining drizzly rain. When I come to this crest of the hill I tapped my brake constantly…