Legal Opinion

Howard v. Rogers

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1969No. 68-648PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaft, C. J.

The Court of Appeals advanced as the only reason for its judgment of reversal that the trial court “failed to submit the issues of contributory negligence and/or assumption of risk to the jury.” Neither of those issues had been raised by the pleadings nor had any party suggested that they should have been submitted to the jury for consideration. Hence, we agree with counsel for both parties that the reason advanced by the Court of Appeals will not support its judgment. See Rhoades v. Cleveland *44(1952), 157 Ohio St. 107, 105 N. E. 2d 2, and Oberlin v. Friedman (1965), 5 Ohio St. 2d 1, 213 N. E.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Wagner Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Campbell v. Hudges Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Holdshoe v. WhineryOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Oberlin v. FriedmanOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Sherlock v. Strouss-Hirshberg Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Mason v. RobertsOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Simpson v. Big Bear Stores Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Reitz v. May Co. Department StoresOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Vanderbilt v. Pier 27, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013

41 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