Fry v. Hildreth
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By THE COURT:
This is an appeal on law from the Municipal Court of Dayton returned in favor of the defendant. Motion for new trial was filed and overruled.
Plaintiff-appellant has assigned thirteen separate alleged errors, some of which have not been discussed in the brief. The Court has carefully examined the entire record and considered every error assigned and finds no error assigned well made.
We briefly comment on the several questions discussed in appellant’s brief. The appellant cannot urge as error the action of the court in striking certain allegations from the statement of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. DriscollOhio Supreme Court · 1922
- Holt v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1923
- Morrow, Recr. v. Hess, Aud.Ohio Supreme Court · 1927
- Telinde v. the Ohio Traction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1923
- Norris v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Blazer v. BlackCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1952
- State v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals · 1954