Legal Opinion

Thomas v. Csonka

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 5, 1934No. 2361PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*100OPINION

By STEVENS, J.

The physical facts in connection with the occurrence in question, together with the other evidence, clearly demonstrate that a person of ordinary care and prudence, in the position of plaintiff at the time she started across said street, might reasonably conclude that she had ample time to cross said street in safety,' if defendant operated his automobile in a lawful and careful manner.

“If the decedent, having equal right with the defendant to the use of said intersection, entered upon said intersection when the defendant’s automobile was far enough away so that a person…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sifling v. KarnikOhio Court of Appeals · 1933

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Boenke v. Cincinnati Street Ry. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API