Legal Opinion

Pratt v. Byers

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 23, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHornbeck, J.

There might be some question on the state of the bill of exceptions as none of the evidence appears and the necessity of the charges must be assumed, whether we have properly before us the legal question sought to be raised by the defendant. But we waive the technical objection, and pass upon the question made by the defendant.

There is doubt if the statement of the fcourt in the general charge modified, qualified, or explained special instruction No. 2. The mere fact that the court characterized it as an explanation does not establish it as such if the effect of what was said did not amount…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gano v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1929
  2. Cincinnati Street Ry. Co. v. AdamsOhio Court of Appeals · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Vorum v. GormanOhio Court of Appeals · 1953
  2. Hatter v. McMunnOhio Court of Appeals · 1935
  3. Stocker v. ArnoldOhio Court of Appeals · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API