Watson v. Klamath County

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Watson v. Klamath County

827 P.2d 207, 112 Or. App. 268, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 585

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 1, 1992

Docket8902595-CV; CA A69146

StatusPublished

This text of 827 P.2d 207 (Watson v. Klamath County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Watson v. Klamath County, 827 P.2d 207, 112 Or. App. 268, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 585 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

In this personal injury negligence action, the trial court denied plaintiffs motion for a directed verdict. The jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant Klamath County. The trial court then granted plaintiffs motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict against the county. County appeals.

There was evidence from which the jury could have determined that negligence of the driver of the vehicle in which plaintiff was riding was the sole cause of the accident and plaintiffs injuries. The issue was properly submitted to the jury. The trial court erred in granting the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

We affirm on plaintiffs cross-appeal.

On appeal, reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment on the jury verdict; affirmed on cross-appeal.

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

PER CURIAM

In this personal injury negligence action, the trial court denied plaintiffs motion for a directed verdict. The jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant Klamath County. The trial court then granted plaintiffs motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict against the county. County appeals.

There was evidence from which the jury could have determined that negligence of the driver of the vehicle in which plaintiff was riding was the sole cause of the accident and plaintiffs injuries. The issue was properly submitted to the jury. The trial court erred in granting the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

We affirm on plaintiffs cross-appeal.

On appeal, reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment on the jury verdict; affirmed on cross-appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

827 P.2d 207, 112 Or. App. 268, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-klamath-county-orctapp-1992.