BAAB v. SHOCKLING

No. 79-270.

61 Ohio St. 2d 55 (1980)

BAAB, EXRX., APPELLANT, v. SHOCKLING, APPELLEE.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided January 16, 1980.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Messrs. Berry, Owens & Manning, Mr. Michael Manning and Mr. William M. Owens, for appellant.

Messrs. Day, Ketterer, Raley, Wright & Rybolt, Mr. Louis A. Boettler and Mr. Dennis M. Pilawa, for appellee.


Per Curiam.

Appellant raises two propositions of law. The first proposition asserts that the trial court erred by not directing the verdict for plaintiff on the basis that the defendant acted with wanton misconduct in the operation of his vehicle.

Civ. R. 50 (A) (4) provides the test for a directed verdict. The rule states:

"When a motion for a directed verdict has been properly made, and the trial...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases