Legal Opinion

Bartson v. Craig

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1929No. 21748PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The single question presented by the record is whether the instruction requested relative to contributory negligence and given before argument was erroneous. That instruction is almost identical in terms with that involved in the case of Chesrown v. Bevier, 101 Ohio St., 282, 128 N. E., 94, which was unanimously held to be a correct statement of the law, although preference for a dif ferent form of statement was expressed. The trial judge in that ease had refused to give the requested charge. A judgment for the plaintiff was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, but was reversed by this court for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lima Used Car Exchange Co. v. HemperlyOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Cincinnati Traction Co. v. KrogerOhio Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. McNees v. Cincinnati Street Ry. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Federal ExpressCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
  3. Bahm v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Rd. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Washington Fidelity National Ins. v. HerbertOhio Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Plotkin v. MeeksOhio Supreme Court · 1936

16 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