Case Name: Comedenda Reinhart, Plff. in Err., v. Borough of South Easton
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1886-03-22
Citations: 2 Sadler 90
Docket Number: 
Parties: Comedenda Reinhart, Plff. in Err., v. Borough of South Easton.
Judges: 
Reporter: Cases in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; being those cases not designated to be reportedÉ
Volume: 2
Pages: 90–90

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.