Sousa v. Schultz
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
VICKERY, PJ.
The argument is very ingenuous by which counsel seeks to maintain an action for the damages which resulted irrespective of what caused them. He admits that an action for assault and battery would be barred in one year and he admits, for he must do so, that his action w,as not brought within the year, but he says it is the damages that he is after. That is a very naive statement. Of course, lawsuits of this sort are brought for damages, but how the damages can be separated from, the cause which created them is rather mysterious. If there had been no assault, there would not have…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dean v. AngelasOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- Williams v. PressmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1953
- Grimm v. WhiteOhio Court of Appeals · 1980