PULLEY v. MALEK

No. 85-1526.

25 Ohio St. 3d 95 (1986)

PULLEY, APPELLEE, v. MALEK ET AL., APPELLANTS.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided July 23, 1986.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Seymour Gross, for appellee.

Gallagher, Sharp, Fulton & Norman, Joseph W. Pappalardo and Lynn L. Moore, for appellants.


CELEBREZZE, C.J.

The first question for our review is whether a directed verdict on the issue of liability should have been entered in favor of appellee. Appellants contend that there was sufficient evidence supporting the statutory defense that appellee had tormented the dog to send this case to the jury. We agree with appellants.

Civ. R. 50(A)(4) states that a motion for a directed verdict shall not be entered unless, after construing the evidence most strongly...

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