Cincinnati Riverfront Coliseum, Inc. v. McNulty Co.

The general issues presented in the instant action are (1) whether a new trial was properly granted to Clark and (2) whether the city’s motions for a directed verdict were properly denied. For the reasons that follow, we answer in the affirmative on both issues and uphold the decision of the court of appeals.

I

The Riverfront Appeal

Riverfront contends that the court of appeals erred when it reversed the decision of the trial court and granted Clark a new trial. The new trial *336was granted on the basis of the trial court’s refusal to consider written interrogatories submitted by Clark.

On the day…