Case ID: sadler_2/html/0090-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Comedenda Reinhart, Plff. in Err., v. Borough of South Easton.
    A mere scintilla of evidence of a material fact is not sufficient to justify a submission of the question to the jury.
    (Decided March 22, 1886.)
    Error to the Common Pleas of Northampton County to review a judgment of nonsuit, in an action to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s husband, resulting from the alleged negligence of defendant.
    Affirmed.
    
      G. Albert Sandt and John C. Merrill for plaintiff in error.
    
      H. W. Scott and W. S. Kirkpatrick for defendant in error.
   Per Curiam:

It is now well-settled law that a mere scintilla of evidence of a material fact does not justify a judge in leaving it to the jury. Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Yerger, 73 Pa. 121, and cases there cited.

A careful examination of the evidence fails to disclose any substantial variance from that shown when the case was here before. South Easton v. Reinhart, 13 W. N. C. 389.

We see no reason to change the conclusion at which we then arrived.

Judgment affirmed.