Ohio Central Traction Co. v. Mateer

Citations

• 21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 478

Syllabus

<p>ERROR — STREET RAILWAYS.</p> <p>Í. Attempting to Board an Interurban Car in Motion Precludes Recovery for Injuries by Prospective Passenger.</p> <p>Injuries received by one intending to become a passenger on, and while attempting to board, an interurban car in motion and before the car is stopped, are the result of contributory negligence on the part of such prospective passenger; hence, no recovery therefor* can be had, especially, if the jerking motion complained of was caused by slippery rails while the motorman was attempting to stop the car, the motorman not knowing, or by the exercise of ordinary care not having knowledge that such passenger was attempting to get on the car.</p> <p>2. Reversal of Judgment for Overruling Motion to Direct Verdict at Close of Plaintiff’s Case, Defendant having Introduced Evidence, is Erroneous.</p> <p>Where a motion to direct a verdict at close of plaintiff’s evidence is-overruled, and the defendant then introduces evidence, it is error for the reviewing court to reverse the judgment for failure to direct verdict; but the court must look to all the evidence to determine whether a case, is made to justify submission to. the jury; if on remand it appears that the verdict is not sustained by evidence of plaintiff or defendant, judgment will be reversed.</p> <p>[Syllabus approved by the court.]</p>