Legal Opinion
Dixon v. Millhorn
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided January 30, 1936PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By SHERICK, J.
On or about 8:30 A. M. of March 27, 1934, Evelyn M. Millhorn delivered to the plaintiff in error, David Dixon, a suit of clothes to be cleaned and pressed. About 9 P. M. of the same day, Mrs. Millhorn called upon Dixon and advised him that a diamond pin had been left in the cuff of the trousers. At that time the suit had already been delivered to another for cleaning, and the pin was not found at the cleaners. Although it is affirmed and denied that a diamond pin was in the suit, the proof establishes that some kind of a pin with a safety catch attachment was in the cuff…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bertig v. NormanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Copelin v. Berlin Dye Works & Laundry Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Berry v. Cadillac Storage Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Dikomey Manufacturing Jewelers, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Leary v. Nantahala Power and Light Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Wilson Freight Forwarding Co. v. Cleveland, Columbus & Cincinnati Highway, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1943
- Hartford Acc. & Indem. v. DIKOMEY MFG., ETC.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Himmelsbach-Preston v. Royal Custom CleanersClermont County Municipal Court · 2005