Legal Opinion

Louisville Brick & Tile Co. v. Calmelat

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 24, 1917PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error: Court of Appeals for Stark county.

1Opinion of the CourtPowell, J.

The parties stand in this court in the inverse order to that in which they stood in the court below, the plaintiff in error being defendant in that court, and the defendants in error, *436plaintiffs. We will refer to them in this opinion in the order in which they stood in the trial court.

The plaintiffs are the owners of a tract of land described in the petition. The defendant is a manufacturer of brick, tile and other clay products. Its plant is located immediately west of the premises of plaintiffs. It'owns and operates continuously sixteen tile or brick kilns, and had so owned and operated…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Brown v. Scioto Cty. Bd. of Commrs.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. E. Rauh & Sons Fertilizer Co. v. ShrefflerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
  3. Gibson v. Park Poultry, Inc., 2006 Ca 00296 (8-13-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Magnolia Pipe Line Co. v. PolkSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  5. Olpp v. Hocking Valley Railway Co., Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1920

4 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