Legal Opinion

Coleman v. Renesch

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 18, 1923PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichards, J.

The defendant, Maude Renesch, was the owner of a vacant lot in the city of Cincinnati, across a portion of which was a, more or less beaten path which had been used by members of the public for a long time. People who were traveling on foot and wished to pass from Zumstein avenue to Observatory road, or vice versa, frequently used this pathway as a *178short out, and by so doing avoided a longer route on the public streets. The plaintiff herself, Susan W. Coleman, was familiar with this path, having frequently used it.

On the evening of February 28, 1921, after dark, the plaintiff having occasion…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hargreaves v. DeaconMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Reardon v. ThompsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
  3. Redigan v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  4. Habina v. Twin City General Electric Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Carskaddon v. MillsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Elliman v. GombarOhio Court of Appeals · 1949
  2. Susan Blackwell v. Dean FranchiMichigan Supreme Court · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API