Pitt, Admx. v. Nichols
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
A novel situation is presented by the record in this case. The claim for damages is predicated upon allegations of negligent operation of defendant’s motor truck by his employee in the following particulars: Excessive, unlawful and dangerous rate of speed; failing to keep a proper lookout in approaching the intersection; failing to keep the truck under control and divert its course so as to avoid the collision upon seeing the perilous position of plaintiff’s decedent ; and failing to have serviceable brakes and horn.
In support of the claim thus made in the petition, the record discloses the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hamden Lodge No. 517 v. Ohio Fuel Gas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1934
- Morris v. BloomgreenOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- Martin, Jr. v. HeintzOhio Supreme Court · 1933
- Martin v. MonkWashington Supreme Court · 1933
3Cited by5 opinions
- Garbe v. HalloranOhio Supreme Court · 1948
- Hartford Fire Ins. v. Henry J. Spieker Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1956
- Eshelman v. WilsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
- Morrin v. BondOhio Court of Appeals · 1950
- Tolliver v. City of NewarkOhio Supreme Court · 1945