(Download) "Georgia Capriglione v. Southwestern Bell" by Supreme Court of Missouri " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Georgia Capriglione v. Southwestern Bell
- Author : Supreme Court of Missouri
- Release Date : January 09, 1964
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
Mrs. Capriglione sought $25,000 as damages for alleged personal injuries she sustained as the result of the averred negligence
of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, a corporation. We shall sometimes refer to the parties as they were designated in
the trial court. A jury's verdict was for the defendant. The trial court granted plaintiff a new trial for the stated reason
that the court erred in giving contributory negligence instruction 3-A. Defendant appealed from the new trial order and contends
the trial court erred in refusing to direct a defendant's verdict at the close of all the evidence and in holding that instruction
3-A was erroneous. Inasmuch as we have determined, for reasons which will hereinafter appear, that the trial court did not
err in granting a new trial for the giving of instruction 3-A, we first determine defendant's contention that plaintiff failed
to make a submissible case. In determining whether the trial court should have directed a verdict for defendant, we state the evidence from the standpoint
most favorable to plaintiff, give her the benefit of all favorable inferences arising therefrom, and disregard defendant's
evidence unless it aids plaintiff's case. Daniels v. Smith, Mo., 323 S.W.2d 705, 706[1]. We bear in mind also that a jury
"may believe all of the testimony of any witness or none of it, or may accept it in part and reject it in part; just as the
jury finds it to be true or false when considered in relation to the other testimony and the facts and circumstances in a
case," Burr v. Singh, Mo., 243 S.W.2d 295, 298[4,5]; and that an issue is for the jury to decide unless the evidence and the
reasonable favorable inferences therefrom "are so strongly against plaintiff as to leave no room for reasonable minds to differ."
Nelson v. O'Leary, Mo., 291 S.W.2d 142, 147[2-4].