Gunning v. Cooley
281 U.S. 90 (1930)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Gunning v. Cooley, 281 U.S. 90 (1930)

Gunning v. Cooley

No. 31

Argued November 26, 1929

Decided March 12, 1930

281 U.S. 90

Syllabus

1. A mere scintilla of evidence is not enough to require the submission of an issue to the jury in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. P. 281 U. S. 94.

2. Upon a motion for a peremptory instruction, the question is not whether there is literally no evidence, but whether there is any

Page 281 U. S. 91

upon which a jury can properly find a verdict for the party producing it, upon whom the onus of proof is imposed. P. 281 U. S. 94.

3. In determining a motion by the defendant for a peremptory instruction, the court assumes that the evidence for the plaintiff proves all that it reasonably may be found sufficient to establish and that, from such facts, there should be drawn in favor of the plaintiff all the inferences that fairly are deducible from them. P. 281 U. S. 94.

4. Where uncertainty as to the existence of negligence arises from a conflict in the testimony or because, the facts being undisputed, fair-minded men will honestly draw different conclusions from them, the question is not one of law, but of fact, to be settled by the jury. P. 281 U. S. 94.

5. In an action for personal injuries due to negligence, the burden is on the plaintiff to establish the negligence and the injury alleged, and, if the evidence fails adequately to support either element, the defendant's motion for a peremptory instruction should be granted. P. 281 U. S. 95.

6. Plaintiff's evidence examined and found sufficient to justify a finding by the jury that the defendant, while treating her as her physician, negligently put some harmful fluid into her ears, causing her pain and injury. P. 281 U. S. 95.

7. Upon a review by certiorari, this Court is not called on to consider any question not raised by the petition for the writ. P. 281 U. S. 98.

30 F.2d 467 affirmed.

Certiorari, 279 U.S. 828, to a judgment of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District for the plaintiff in an action for personal injuries.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.