...appellant that the plaintiff wholly failed to prove the negligence specified in his petition, and that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. The accident which resulted in plaintiff's injury was a head-end collision between the passenger train...

...Id. 236. HAET, J., (after stating the facts). The principal question presented for our consideration is whether the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. It is contended that plaintiff was at most a licensee to whom the defendant owed no duty except to...

...never knew of the death of nine brothers and sisters who died in infancy. [2] I am of the opinion that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. The misrepresentations made by the insured were concerning matters vital to the risk and rendered the policy...

...reversal of the judgment which the supreme court ordered. The first point made by the appellant is that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff's intestate was a switchmnn. While performing his duties as such, several sticks of timber...

...delivered the opinion of the court. The chief question which this record presents for our determination is whether the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the Nevada Company on the first count of its complaint for the sum of $41,250, with interest thereon...

...Is that of the fellow servant who placed the tie too near the track; and it follows, therefore, that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. Judgment reversed and a new trial granted. The other Justices concurred. GRIMM v. SECRETARY OF STATE....

...judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial. The principal question here to be considered is whether the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. The law applicable to this case is well settled. While an act of God will excuse 231 a common carrier for...

...was also some evidence tending to show a motive for the crime. It is contended by the appellant that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant, and in refusing to set aside the verdict for the State on the grouud of insufficiency of the evidence,...

...error. * Singer Manufacturing Company v. Cramer, 688. 2. DECISION REVERSED — NEW TRIAL. — Held that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant on the ground that no infringement whatever was shown, and the cause remanded for new trial. *Id. INJUNCTION....

...necessary implication within the line of his duty under his employment"; and that learned court held that the trial court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant. The facts in that case are quite analogous to those in the case at bar. The defendant was the owner of...