Westerhaus Co. v. City of Cincinnati
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtTaft, J.
The first contention of plaintiff is that the Court of Appeals erred in hearing the appeal as one on law and fact. Since the Court of Appeals heard this cause de novo in accordance with the provisions of Section 12223-21, General Code (now Section 2505.21, Revised Code), relative to the procedure to be followed where an appeal is taken on questions of law and fact, we have before us in a bill of exceptions only the evidence considered by the Court of Appeals and not that considered by the Common Pleas Court. Therefore, if the Court of Appeals erred in hearing the appeal as one on law and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. HudsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1946
- Kraus v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1939
- Youngstown Municipal Ry. Co. v. City of YoungstownOhio Supreme Court · 1946
- State Ex Rel. Dussault v. KilburnMontana Supreme Court · 1941
- Meyer v. MeyerOhio Supreme Court · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.