Payne v. Gowdy

¶ 72. The majority finds that the circuit court did not err in denying the Paynes’ motion for a JNOV. Because I believe that Cleveland was negligent as a matter of law for failing to see what he should have seen, I dissent. I would reverse and render the circuit court’s judgment, and remand this case for a trial on damages and on the issue of whether Cleveland was acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident.

¶ 73. “A motion for JNOV is a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence, and [an appellate court] will affirm the denial of a JNOV if there is…