Dayton Folding Box Co. v. Ruehlman
Ohio Circuit Courts
Error to the superior court of Cincinnati. Cited and commented upon the following authorities. Hollis v. Glass Co. 220 Pa. St. 49 [69 Atl. Rép. 55]; Saxton v. Railway, 219 Pa. St. 492 [68 Atl. Rep. 1022]; Wagner v. Hazle Tp. 215 Pa. St. 219 [64 Atl. Rep. 405] ; Cunningham v. Heidelberger, 48 Misc. 614 [95 N. Y. Supp. 554]; Manigold v. Traction Co. 81 App. Div. 381 [80 N. Y. Supp. 861]; Lenahan v. Coal Mining Co. 70 Atl. Rep. 884 (Pa.); Third Nat. Bank v. Faults, 115 Mo.
Read the full summary
Error to the superior court of Cincinnati. Cited and commented upon the following authorities. Hollis v. Glass Co. 220 Pa. St. 49 [69 Atl. Rép. 55]; Saxton v. Railway, 219 Pa. St. 492 [68 Atl. Rep. 1022]; Wagner v. Hazle Tp. 215 Pa. St. 219 [64 Atl. Rep. 405] ; Cunningham v. Heidelberger, 48 Misc. 614 [95 N. Y. Supp. 554]; Manigold v. Traction Co. 81 App. Div. 381 [80 N. Y. Supp. 861]; Lenahan v. Coal Mining Co. 70 Atl. Rep. 884 (Pa.); Third Nat. Bank v. Faults, 115 Mo. App. 42 [90 S. W. Rep. 755]; Balder v. Furnace Co. 103 Minn. 345 [114 N. W. Rep. 948]; City Electric Ry. v. Salmon, 1 Ga.…
1Opinion of the CourtSwing, J.
This ease is in this court on error to a judgment rendered in the superior court of Cincinnati, wherein a judgment was recovered by Ruehlman in an action for personal injuries.
It is urged that the judgment is not sustained by sufficient evidence. We think it is sustained by sufficient evidence. The evidence clearly shows that the machine which produced the injury had not worked properly; that the defendant was informed of the fact by Ruehlman; that the defendant attempted to fix the machine, and informed plaintiff that it was all right — although the weight of the evidence i's probably to the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wagner v. Hazle TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- People ex rel. Sinclair v. SinclairNew York Supreme Court · 1905