Kinserlow v. CMI Corp., Bid-Well Div. - 217 F.3d 1021 (8th Cir. 2000)

Rule:

In a motion for judgment as a matter of law, the nonmoving party is only entitled to the benefit of reasonable inferences. A reasonable inference is one which may be drawn from the evidence without resort to speculation. When the record contains no proof beyond speculation to support the verdict, judgment as a matter of law is appropriate.

Facts:

Appellant Kinserlow, a cement mason working for Fred Weber, Inc. (FWI), brought the present action for personal injuries against appellee, CMI Corporation, Bid-Well Division (Bid-Well), after he fell from a bridge over a highway in St. Louis County, Missouri. The workbridge had lost any identifying markings or labels it might have once had. Bid-Well filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, which the trial court granted. According to the trial court, the appellant failed to establish by a preponderance that Bid-Well, rather than some other manufacturer, had manufactured, sold, or distributed the tapered end section of the workbridge from which appellant fell. Appellant contended that the trial court should have given him the benefit of all beneficial inferences and not considered any of Bid-Well's evidence except as it might have helped his case.

Issue:

Under the circumstances, did the trial court err in granting appellee's motion for judgment as a matter of law? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court found the trial court properly granted appellee's motion for judgment as a matter of law since appellant had not offered enough evidence to tie appellee to the workbridge from which appellant fell and the court was entitled to give credence to any of appellee's evidence that was uncontradicted and unimpeached.