Legal Opinion

Daugherty v. Wilson & Son

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 23, 1933No. 2303PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BY THE COURT

Motion for new trial having been filed and overruled, error is prosecuted to this court.

Counsel not only in the oral arguments, but in their briefs have submitted several very interesting questions and have supported their respective contentions with, what we are pleased to term, unusually helpful briefs.

We have considered the record and these briefs with care, but shall not attempt to quote in detail from the record nor to discuss the many pertinent authorities which have been cited by counsel. We shall content ourselves with announcing the conclu,sion at which we have arrived…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Smith v. Fulton, Supt. of BanksOhio Court of Appeals · 1935
  2. Ames Co. v. BusickOhio Court of Appeals · 1942
  3. French v. FriesingerOhio Court of Appeals · 1941
  4. McMillen v. Willard Garage, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1968
  5. Worley v. Dickerson, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1953

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

Powered by the Exa API