Case ID: ohio-law-abs_3/html/0054-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BY THE COURT.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 95
    BONSANGUE v. DOWELL
    Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist., Cuyahoga Co.
    No. 4925.
    Decided March 3, 1924
    Middleton, P. J., Sayre, and Mauck, 4th Dist., sitting.
    1235. VERDICT—Return of, fostered by proper instructions of trial! court, not disturbed.
    Published only in Ohio Law Abstract
    Attorneys—J. V. Zottarelli, for Bonsangue; H. F. Glick, for Dowell, both of Cleveland.
   BY THE COURT.

Epitomized Opinion

Bonsangue argued that a machine driven by Dowell hurled him 25 feet, after which Dowell went 150 feet before machine stopped.

Court of Appeals held that merit might be found in contention that verdict was against the weight of evidence, if such testimony was not sharply controverted by Dowell in the trial court. Instruction of that court were sound; if additional instruction were proper and desired it was necessary for party desiring them to so request trial judge. Judgment against Bonsangue was affirmed.