Legal Opinion

Souder v. Hassenfeldt, Admx.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 5, 1934No. 2855PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By WILLIAMS, J.

There was testimony in the record tending to prove that the defendant was driving her automobile at a speed of between 25 and 30 miles an hour. The trial judge instructed the jury, as he was warranted in doing on the uncontroverted evidence, that the section of the city where the accident happened was a closely built-up section within the meaning of §12603, GC, in accordance with the rule laid down in Konte v Community Traction Co., 35 Oh Ap, 361, 122 Oh St, 514. In such a section of the city, under this statute, it was at the time of the accident prima facie unlawful…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. MacHaterre v. DushaOhio Court of Appeals · 1927
  2. Morr v. MerkleOhio Court of Appeals · 1932
  3. Lazzara v. HartOhio Court of Appeals · 1933

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Franklin v. NowakOhio Court of Appeals · 1935
  2. Rockwell v. Ohio Turnpike CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1954
  3. Wade, Admx. v. SchneiderOhio Court of Appeals · 1939
  4. Morrin v. BondOhio Court of Appeals · 1950
  5. Buckeye Stages, Inc. v. BowersOhio Supreme Court · 1935

1 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