Legal Opinion

City of Wooster v. Arbenz

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 29, 1927No. 19914PublishedCited by 106 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C. J.

For the purposes of this discussion we shall assume that the driver of the truck employed by the city and engaged in hauling the cinders was negligent and that his negligence was the proximate cause of the injuries sustained by Arbenz, and that Arbenz was himself free from negligence contributing thereto. We shall discuss this case wholly and solely upon the question of the character of the service then being rendered for the city by its agents and servants, and whether they were then engaged in the performance of a public and governmental function.

This court is for the present committed to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McMahon v. City of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
  2. Aldrich v. City of YoungstownOhio Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Barney v. City of LowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
  4. Hewitt v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Bates v. Village of RutlandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1890

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by106 opinions

  1. Taylor v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Greene County Agricultural Society v. LimingOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Home Indemnity Co. v. Village of PlymouthOhio Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Johnson's Markets, Inc. v. New Carlisle Department of HealthOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Greene Cty. Agricultural Soc. v. LimingOhio Supreme Court · 2000

101 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