Legal Opinion

Woolworth Co. v. Russo

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 14, 1933No. Nos 314 & 319PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*309OPINION

By BARNES, J.

We have been favored with very able and comprehensive briefs presented by counsel representing the respective parties.

It will be advantageous to make slight reference to the evidence as it bears upon the issues.

Plaintiff makes claim for special damages in the sum of $150; $90 for four drying-machines claimed to have been destroyed and $60 for linoleoum required to be replaced. The evidence supports these two items but in different amounts. Plaintiff’s testimony relative to the linoleum was that there was a damage of $20 and there is no evidence supporting a higher amount.…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Glyco v. SchultzSylvania Municipal Court · 1972
  2. Howard v. SimonOhio Court of Appeals · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API