Ohio Public Service Co. v. Dehring
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
On the trial of the case the court refused certain requests to charge before argument submitted by plaintiff, numbered 4, 5, 6 and ”9.
By request No. 4 the plaintiff sought to establish the principle that the unsightliness of the towers and transmission lines could not be considered by the jury. We think that this w,as properly refused, for the reason, that unsightliness which affected the value of the land was a proper element for the jury to consider in determining damage to the residue.
Request No. 5 was as follows:
“Danger from lightning, danger that a- cable might break and fall, danger…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Beckman v. Lincoln & Northwestern RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- Frazee v. Kentucky Utilities CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
3Cited by20 opinions
- Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- La Plata Elec. Ass'n, Inc. v. CumminsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
- San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. DaleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Willsey v. Kansas City Power & Light Co.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1981
- Hicks v. United States ex rel. T. V. A.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.