Legal Opinion

Baldridge v. Wright Gas Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 17, 1951No. 32109PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtZimmerman, J.

In seeking a reversal of the judgments below the defendant company insists that the evidence introduced was insufficient to establish its liability to plaintiff for his injuries and further insists that such evidence demonstrated that plaintiff assumed the risk of a condition which was obvious and known to him.

Upon the trial of the action all the evidence was introduced by plaintiff and by witnesses he called; the defendant produced no witnesses.

A perusal of the bill of exceptions discloses the following:

Plaintiff purchased a gas water heater from a mercantile establishment at Hillsboro,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Flint & Walling Manufacturing Co. v. BeckettIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Masters v. New York Central Rd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Northwestern Ohio Natural Gas Co. v. First Congregational ChurchOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Sternbock v. Consolidated Gas Utilities Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1940
  5. Coakley v. Prentiss-Wabers Stove Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1923

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Ramona Freeman, Etc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
  2. Queen City Terminals, Inc. v. General American Transportation Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Crawford v. HalkovicsOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Queen City Terminals, Inc. v. Gen. Am. Transp. Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Kafel v. Republic Steel Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1972

7 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