Dean v. King, Pennock & King
Ohio Supreme Court
Error, to the Superior Court of Cincinnati. Tire original action was brought by the defendants in error, King, Pennock & King, to recover of the plaintiffs in error, wlio were owners of the steamboat Lady Franklin,, tbe value of twenty bales of cotton.
Read the full summary
Error, to the Superior Court of Cincinnati. Tire original action was brought by the defendants in error, King, Pennock & King, to recover of the plaintiffs in error, wlio were owners of the steamboat Lady Franklin,, tbe value of twenty bales of cotton. The snit was brought on an ordinary bill or lading, which purported that tbe Lady Franklin had received seveuty-three bales of cotton from the agents of the plaintiff, at Memphis, Tennessee, and was to carry the same for four dollars per bale to Cincinnati, Ohio, and there deliver them to B. M. Forbes, an agent of the plaintiffs. Fifty-three…
1Opinion of the CourtMcIlvaine, J.
The first question to be determined in this case is one of practice.
Will this court, upon petition in error, review the testimony and reverse the judgment of an inferior court, which judgment itself is a judgment of reversal rendered upon proceedings in error to an inferior tribunal, the ground of reversal being that the court rendering the original judgment erred in refusing to set aside its judgment, on a claim that it was not sustained by sufficient evidence; the cause after reversal having been remanded to the court of original jurisdiction for further trial and proceedings, where it is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Walter v. BrewerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Beatty v. HatcherOhio Supreme Court · 1861