Legal Opinion

Suran v. Lustic Shoe Store

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 7, 1933PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.

As perhaps before suggested, there is nothing in this case to indicate that a foreign substance other than mere moisture had been placed upon or used in connection with the floor of the vestibule. It was evidently the theory of the trial court in directing the verdict that if there was a dangerous condition on the floor of the vestibule, as claimed, that there is no evidence in the case indicating that the defendant had knowledge thereof, either actual knowledge or that the condition had existed so long or under such circumstances that it might be reasonably presumed that knowledge of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lowe v. the Hippodrome Inn Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. KinneyOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  3. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. KinneyOhio Court of Appeals · 1929

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Pazik v. DevineOhio Court of Appeals · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API