Marsh v. Illinois Cent. R.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
175 F.2d 498 (1949)
- Written by DeAnna Swearingen, LLM
Facts
Marsh (plaintiff) was injured while working as a fireman for Illinois Central Railroad (Railroad) (defendant). Marsh sued the Railroad for negligence. After all evidence was presented, the Railroad moved for a directed verdict. The judge denied the motion, and the jury found in favor of Marsh. The Railroad moved the court to enter judgment notwithstanding the verdict (j.n.o.v.) or, alternatively, to grant a new trial. The Railroad asserted several bases for the motion, including that the verdict was contrary to the evidence. The judge entered a j.n.o.v. because “[t]he weight of the evidence is so overwhelmingly against the plaintiff that as a matter of law” judgment must be entered for the Railroad. The judge also stated that the motion for a directed verdict ought to have been granted because there was not enough evidence to send the question to the jury. Nevertheless, the judge concluded that there were “no other errors of law” warranting a new trial. Marsh appealed the j.n.o.v. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Railroad appealed the denial of the new trial motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sibley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 795,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.