Legal Opinion

Fightmaster, a Minor v. Tauber

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 11, 1932PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHamilton, J.

The question of law for decision here is: Whether where an employer is sued for negligence of the agent in driving the truck, judgment against the employer is a bar to a subsequent action of negligence against the agent, the defendant in this case.

The demurrer admits the facts pleaded in the second defense.

The claim of the plaintiff in error is, that the judgment in the Mode case, pleaded in the second defense, is not res adjudicata of the present case. His argument is that Tauber, the defendant in this cause, and Mode, the defendant in the judgment pleaded, were not, and could not have been…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
  2. Cuneo Importing Co. v. American Importing & Transportation Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
  3. Spencer v. WatkinsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. In Re: Daniel Fordu, Debtor. Harold A. Corzin v. Julie A. ForduCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  2. Davis v. PerrymanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1956
  3. Templeton v. ScudderNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
  4. Deaton v. BurneyOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. In Re Robert N. Jones and Margaret N. Jones, Debtors, Philip F. Boberschmidt, Trustee v. Society National Bank, N/k/a Key BankCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000

9 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