Kinserlow v. CMI Corp., Bid-Well Div.

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff sued Defendant for personal injuries after he fell from a workbridge he believed Defendant manufactured.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

In a motion for judgment as a matter of law, the nonmoving party is only entitled to the benefit of reasonable inferences.

Facts.

Kinserlow (Plaintiff), a cement mason, sued CMI Corporation, Bid-Well Division (Defendant) for personal injuries after he fell from a workbridge presumably manufactured by the Defendant. Defendant moved for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50, on the basis that they did not manufacture the workbridge.

Issue.

Is judgment as a matter of law proper when a court finds no reasonable inference favoring the position of the nonmoving party?

Held.

Yes, judgment as a matter of law is proper. The district court is affirmed.

Discussion.

The Court determined that the evidence did not support a reasonable inference that Defendant had manufactured the workbridge.