St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri
237 S.W.2d 225 (1951)
Fred Bommer (plaintiff) sued Jerome Stedelin (defendant) for damage that occurred to Bommer's car while it was parked in a garage. Bommer alleged that Stedelin managed the garage and therefore was liable for the damage. Stedelin moved for a directed verdict on the grounds that Bommer failed to prove that allegation. The trial judge indicated that he would grant the motion after an hour's recess. Bommer asked the judge to reopen the evidence, promising to produce additional proof of Stedelin's management of the garage within an hour. The record did not show any reason why the judge, jury, parties, or witnesses would have been surprised or inconvenienced by an hour's delay. The judge denied Bommer leave to reopen, and after the recess he directed the verdict for Stedelin. Bommer appealed to the St. Louis Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.