Legal Opinion

Schlarb v. Hartwell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 1935No. 24814PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed for the reason that this cause was heard by the Court of Appeals on appeal and no bill of exceptions was presented to and allowed by the Court of Appeals. Section 11566, General Code. (Hill v. Bassett, 27 Ohio St., 597; Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Rd. Co. v. Blaum, 120 Ohio St., 612, 169 N. E., 297; and Micklethwait v. City of Portsmouth, 110 Ohio St., 514, 144 N. E., 274.)

Judgment affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Micklethwait v. City of PortsmouthOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Detroit, Toledo Ironton Rd. Co. v. BlaumOhio Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. DeMoss v. Conart Motor Sales, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Luper v. Action Industries, Inc. (In re Lee Way Holding Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1990
  3. Knowlson v. BellmanOhio Supreme Court · 1953