Legal Opinion

Harry Goldberg Co. v. Emerman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1932No. 23289PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

Defendant below, the plaintiff in error here, claims that the trial court, in overruling its oral demand for a jury at the opening of the trial, violated the provision of the Constitution which guarantees that the right of a trial by a jury shall be inviolate (Article 1, Section 5).

Section 1579-24, General Code, applying to the Municipal Court of Cleveland, reads: “All causes in the municipal court, both civil and criminal, shall be tried by the court unless a jury trial be demanded by a party entitled to the same. The time for making a demand for a jury trial in civil cases may be fixed and…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. City of Mentor v. GiordanoOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Cassidy v. GlossipOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. HallidayOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Markota v. East Ohio Gas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1951
  5. State v. BergSupreme Court of Iowa · 1946

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API