DISSENTING OPINION
By SHERICK, J.I agree with the majority except on onq proposition.
*663I dissent from the judgment arrived at for the reason that it was a disputed question of fact as to whether or not Knowles was an invitee or a mere licensee at time of injury. This question, under the authority of Railroad Company v Vitti, 111 Oh St, 670, was one for the jury, and the trial court erred in its refusal to so charge.