Legal Opinion

Obrecht, a Minor v. Tallentire

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 24, 1932PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHERICK, PJ.

The errors' complained of are nine in number, but we are of opinion that a consideration of two of the errors claimed must be dispositive of the entire controversy. The first, of these raises the question of the court’s application of the law to the facts as adduced in the trial of the case.

We have diligently searched the record for any and all proof on the issue of contributory negligence, and the only evidence that we find responsive to this issue is to be found in the cross-examination of the plaintiff, as set forth in the bill of exceptions. It is there admitted that the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tresise v. AshdownOhio Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Mitchell v. RaymondWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Dillabough v. Okanogan CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  4. June v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Smith v. LopaOhio Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McCrate v. Morgan Packing Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1941
  2. Hardware Mutual Insurance v. McGinnisFayette County Court of Common Pleas · 1954
  3. Currie v. Baltimore & Ohio Rd.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Merritt v. GardnerOhio Court of Appeals · 1935
  5. Cloud v. City of FremontOhio Court of Appeals · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API