Legal Opinion

Uncapher v. Baltimore & Ohio Rd. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1933No. 24177PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.

The parties occupy the same rela tive positions here as in the courts below and they will be referred to as plaintiff and defendant, respectively.

Plaintiff makes ten assignments of error in his petition in error, but seems to place reliance in but two of them in his brief. This court cannot search the record for error that is not in some wise adverted to in the brief of the complaining party, notwithstanding the assignments contained in the petition in error. Errors not treated in the brief will be regarded as having been abandoned by the party who gave them birth.

Plaintiff devotes his brief…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. The LottawannaSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  2. Fish v. Chapman & RossSupreme Court of Georgia · 1847
  3. Union Steamship Co. v. New York & Virginia Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1861
  4. Davison v. FlowersOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  5. United States v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1911

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

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Hawley v. RitleyOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Kohn v. B. F. Goodrich Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Loukinas v. Roto-Rooter Services Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2006
  4. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ironics, Inc. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2022
  5. Meinberg v. GlaserOhio Supreme Court · 1968

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

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

Powered by the Exa API