Legal Opinion

Friedl v. Lackman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 1939No. 27554PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyers, J.

In order to determine whether the Court of Common Pleas committed error prejudicial to the owner, it is necessary to examine the covenant in the lease relating to repairs of the building in question. Did that covenant in any manner change or lessen the responsibility of the owner to a pedestrian on the sidewalk? The covenant states that “The lessor shall keep the outside of said building in good repair * * That does not lessen the responsibility or liability of the owner to the pedestrian on the sidewalk as to any part of the outside of the building. Whatever duty he owed the public as to the…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Lommori v. Milner Hotels, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Marzotto v. Gay Garment Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
  3. Suchy v. MooreOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. City of Dalton v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
  5. Gibbons v. Baltimore & Ohio Rd.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1952

5 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