PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - DIRECTION OF VERDICT - SCINTILLA RULE

Authors

Abstract

In an action to recover from the defendant gas company damage to the plaintiff's building caused by a gas explosion resulting from a defective pipe, the plaintiff's only evidence to prove the defendant's duty to repair it was that the pipe was used exclusively for the conveyance of the defendant's gas, and that the meters to which the pipe was connected were owned and controlled by the defendant. The trial court, by virtue of the scintilla rule, submitted the case to the jury which rendered a verdict for the plaintiff. Held, the scintilla rule no longer prevails in Ohio, and the trial court should have· directed a verdict for the defendant. Hamden Lodge v. The Ohio Fuel Gas Co., 127 Ohio St. 469, 189 N. E. 246 (1934).

Recommended Citation

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - DIRECTION OF VERDICT - SCINTILLA RULE, 33 Mich. L. Rev. 136 (1934).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol33/iss1/19