Mamula v. Ford Motor Company
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion
Sullivan, P. J.
I concede that the “any evidence” rule espoused by the majority is much more easily applied at the trial level with reference to directed verdicts in that the quantum required to meet the test is easily measured, and although the rigidity of that rule points up the ethereal subjectivity of a “substantial evidence” test, which can vary unpredictably from judge to judge, I nevertheless feel that a trial judge should and must direct a verdict if, as a matter of law, the evidence then of record would not support a contrary verdict.
Evidence sufficient to submit a…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Gunning v. CooleySupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Mamula v. Ford Motor CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1971
- Halkias v. Gary National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1968
- Haney v. MeyerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1966
- Wadkins' Adm'x v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1956
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.