 | Ireland. High Court of Chancery - 1865 - 656 pagina’s
...and South Coast Railway Company (b) : — " It " is not enough to say that there was some evidence : a scintilla " of evidence, or a mere surmise that...justify the "Judge in leaving the case to the jury." And Mr. Justice Williams, in delivering judgment in Cotton v. Wood, says: — "I wish " merely to add,... | |
 | Sir William Thomas Charley - 1867 - 256 pagina’s
...been utterly unable to find the existence of any legal duty, or any evidence of the breach of it." A scintilla of evidence, or a mere surmise that there...would not justify the judge in leaving the case to the jury.5 It is fvdly established 1 Leame». Bray (per Le Blanc, J), 3 East, 593. 2 See also in the appendix,... | |
 | Great Britain. Court of Exchequer - 1869 - 444 pagina’s
...idea thus : " It is not enough to say that there was some evidence. ... A scintilla of evidence . . . clearly would not justify the judge in leaving the case to the jury. There must be evidence on which they might reasonably and properly conclude that there AMIS negligence,"—the fact in that... | |
 | 1869 - 370 pagina’s
...suhmitted to a jury with one result. A scintilla of evidence, or a mere surmise that there may have heen negligence on the part of the defendants, clearly would not justify the jndge in leaving the case tS the jury; there must he evidence upon which they might reasonahly and... | |
 | 1892 - 554 pagina’s
...to anthorize the submission of a question as one of fact to the jury, that there is some evidence. A scintilla of evidence, or a mere surmise, that there may have been negligence on the part of the defendant, would not justify the jndge in leaving the case to the jury." Rugor, CJ, in Dwi9ht v. Insurance... | |
 | Great Britain. Courts - 1871 - 552 pagina’s
...ground that there was no evidence of negligence on the part of the company. My Brother Williams there said: "It is not enough to say that there was some...there may have been negligence on the part of the defend*5731 &n ^ s i dearly would not justify the judge in *leaving the case to J the jury: there must... | |
 | Victoria. Supreme Court - 1871 - 380 pagina’s
...Railway Company, 3 CBN 8., 146 ; 27 LJCP, 39. "It is not enough to say that there was some evidence— a mere surmise that there may have been negligence on the part of the defendant clearly would not justify the judge in leaving the case to the jury. There must be evidence... | |
 | New South Wales. Supreme Court - 1872 - 558 pagina’s
...Ryder v. Wombwell (b). "It is not enough to say that there was some evidence. A scintilla of evidence clearly would not justify the Judge in leaving the case to the jury. There must be evidence on which they might reasonably and properly conclude that there was negligence — the fact in that... | |
 | John Proffatt, Abraham Clark Freeman - 1881 - 840 pagina’s
...English case in the court of exchequer: 'It is not enough to say there was some evidence. A frintilla of evidence, or a mere surmise that there may have...leaving the case to the jury. There must be evidence on which the jury might reasonably and properly conclude that there was negligence:' Coraman v. EC... | |
 | Nathaniel Cleveland Moak - 1879 - 1026 pagina’s
...thus : 'It [178 it not enough to say that there was some evidence ... A scintilla of evidence . . . clearly would not justify the judge in leaving the case to the jury. There must bo evidence on which the}' might reasonably and properly conclude that there was negligence.' " This... | |
| |
A scintilla of evidence, or a mere surmise that there may have been negligence on the part of the defendants, clearly would not justify the judge in leaving the case to the jury ; there must be evidence upon which they might reasonably and properly conclude... 
