Berisford v. Sells
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellant has asserted, from the trial court level to this court, that the dismissal of the second claim of her amended complaint, in- effect, thwarted her attempt to challenge the constitutionality of the Ohio guest statute. We disagree, and find that no constitutional question is presented by the proceedings below.
There is no substantial difference, between the two claims presented by appellant. In the first claim, appellant alleges that slm was a “passenger,” who had been damaged through appellee’s ordinary negligence (excessive speed) which was the proximate cause of the injury. ‘ ‘…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- H. E. Culbertson Co. v. WardenOhio Supreme Court · 1931
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bowman v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- McCormick v. Mirrored Image, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1982
- Wray v. ParssonOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Frazier v. SwierkosOhio Court of Appeals · 2009
- Nott v. HomanOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.