Case Name: FURRY v. AKRON & BARBERTON BELT RD CO
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1936-02-19
Citations: 21 Ohio Law Abs. 398
Docket Number: No 2638
Parties: FURRY v AKRON & BARBERTON BELT RD CO
Judges: FUNK, PJ, and WASHBURN, J, concur in judgment.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 21
Pages: 398–399

Head Matter:
FURRY v AKRON & BARBERTON BELT RD CO
Ohio Appeals, 9th Dist, Summit Co
No 2638.
Decided Feb 19, 1936
Yetta Land, Cleveland, and Ferbstein & Sicherman, Akron, for plaintiff in error.
Waters, Andress, Wise, Roetzel & Maxon, Akron, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
OPINION
By STEVENS, J.
It seems to this court that the case of the D., T. & I. Rd. Co. v Rohrs, 114 Oh St 493, is entirely dispositive of the situation here presented, and that reasonable minds could reasonably reach but one conclusion from the evidence, to-wit, that "there is no doubt that had she looked she must have seen the clanger, that was immediately at hand, in time to have avoided the injury.-'
It follows that we are of the opinion the trial court was correct in directing a ver diet for defendant; and the judgment of that court will accordingly be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
FUNK, PJ, and WASHBURN, J, concur in judgment.