Bruner v. McGlothin
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By THE COURT:
The first question presented by this appeal is whether or not the condition of the automobiles after a head-on collision is sufficient to raise an inference of negligence that the defendant was operating the automobile at a dangerous rate of speed or that she failed to keep it under control. We think that this evidence was insufficient to establish any negligence upon the part of the defendant, and that the trial court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant at the close of the plaintiff’s case. Negligence is never presumed but must be proven and the evidence…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Badurina v. BolenOhio Court of Appeals · 1961
- Motorists Mutual Ins. v. WalkerCity of Dayton Municipal Court · 1970
- Davis v. NajmOhio Court of Appeals · 1963
- Estate of Eyler v. DedomenicOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Dannenfelser v. Employment Security Board of ReviewCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1992