Legal Opinion

Sharp v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1988No. 87-71PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

The determinative issue posed in this appeal is whether the trial court was correct in sustaining defendant’s motion for a judgment n.o.v. As part of our decision, we must also consider whether the trial court was correct in finding that the reasonable discemibility of the train at the crossing was obvious, based on the evidence submitted, so as to remove this question from the jury. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the court of appeals’ judgment which affirmed the granting of the motion for judgment n.o.v., and remand the case for a new trial.

The “assured-clear-distance-ahead” rule…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Smiddy v. Wedding Party, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Posin v. A. B. C. Motor Court Hotel, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Tomlinson v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Junge v. BrothersOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Kuhn v. ZabotskyOhio Supreme Court · 1967

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Sharp v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Joshua Nye and Judy Ramirez v. Csx Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
  3. Pond v. LesleinOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Sharp v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Didier v. JohnsOhio Court of Appeals · 1996

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API