Miller v. Lint
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
I
The issue for determination in case No. 79-1087 (defendant’s appeal) is whether a prior statement of opinion by an eyewitness, not a party to the action, upon the ultimate fact in issue and inconsistent with the testimony of such witness at the trial, is admissible for the limited purpose of impeachment.
In Schneiderman v. Sesanstein (1929), 121 Ohio St. 80, at paragraph three of the syllabus, this court succinctly responded to a similar question, holding as follows:
“A witness who testifies as to facts cannot be discredited by evidence of the expression of an opinion relative to the merits of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Schneiderman v. SesansteinOhio Supreme Court · 1929
- Cottom v. KleinOhio Supreme Court · 1931
3Cited by110 opinions
- Marion Production Credit Ass'n v. CochranOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Jenkins v. ClarkOhio Court of Appeals · 1982
- Davis v. Immediate Medical Services, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Lindenschmidt v. Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- City of Cincinnati v. Ohio Council 8, American Federation of State, County & Municipal EmployeesOhio Supreme Court · 1991
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.