Legal Opinion

Baltrunas v. Baubles

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 22, 1926No. 1180PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWashburn, J.

Ignac Baltrunas brought his action in the Summit Common Pleas against Charles Bau bles to recover money damages for criminal conversation. Baltrunas’ petition alleged that on a certain day and divers other days, Baubles had carnal intercourse with his wife, knowing her to he his wife and without his consent by reason of which her affections had been ailen-ated and he had lost her society and comfort and suffered great shame and dishonor. The trial of the case resulted in a verdict for Baubles.

Attorneys — Holloway & Chamberlain for Baltrunas; Carl M. Myers for Baubles; all of Akron.

At the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Valentine v. PollakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  2. Sieber v. PettitSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Mussivand v. DavidOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Strock v. PressnellOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Trainor v. DetersOhio Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. Swartz v. SteeleOhio Court of Appeals · 1974
  5. Haskins v. BiasOhio Court of Appeals · 1981

3 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