Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Nollman

107 F.2d 176, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 2714
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided November 14, 1939·No. Nos. 9136, 9137·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

FOSTER, Circuit Judge.

These two cases present the same questions of fact and law. Appellee, Mrs. R. M. Nollman, was injured by slipping on ice that had formed on the sidewalk in front of appellant’s premises, alleged to have resulted from its negligence.

The only question presented for decision is whether the District Court erred in denying appellant’s motion for a directed verdict at the close of the evidence; and, in the alternative, for judgment non-obstante veredicto, or a new trial.

We find substantial evidence in the record tending to support the verdict.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Nollman, 107 F.2d 176, 1939 U.S. App. LEXIS 2714 (5th Cir. 1939).

107 F.2d 176 (Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Nollman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jennings v. Murphy
194 F.2d 35 (Seventh Circuit, 1952)