Legal Opinion

Eckroate v. Bauders

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 22, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHERICK, PJ.

The first claimed ground of error is that the verdict of the jury, which was in the sum of $1,250, was excessive. It is not claimed, however, that the verdict was the result of passion and prejudice, and after a consideration of the testimony of the plaintiff below,, and the other evidence in the case pertaining to the amount of the injury sustained, we' are unable to say that the verdict was excessive. It was claimed and proven that the plaintiff sustained injury and shock from which she has not yet recovered, and from which she is unlikely to fully recover. In view of this,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. GoldmanOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. McCoyOhio Court of Appeals · 1927
  3. Beck, Trustee v. BeagleOhio Court of Appeals · 1927
  4. Tudor Boiler Manufacturing Co. v. TeekenOhio Court of Appeals · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Greenawalt v. YuhasOhio Court of Appeals · 1947
  2. Conti v. Fid. Bank (In re NC & VA Warranty Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2018
  3. Kinney v. RichardsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API