Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gohman v. City of St. Bernard

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1924No. 18402Published

1Dissent

We concur in the judgment and in that part of the syllabus which relates to the question of damages. However, we dissent from the first three propositions contained in the syllabus.

There are important facts, however, which have been omitted from the majority opinion. When the cause was first taken to the appellate court it was reversed and remanded by the Court of Appeals of the first district. It appears from their opinion, but not from this record, that it was remanded to the trial court with instructions relating to the measure of damages, which another appellate court on the second review…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Southern Railway Co. v. CliftSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. City of Hastings v. FoxworthyNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. MerrillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
  5. Zerulla v. Supreme Lodge Order of Mutual ProtectionIllinois Supreme Court · 1906

8 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