Legal Opinion

Mays v. Minnich

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 27, 1935No. 1307PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*518OPINION

By HORNBECK, J.

The bill of exceptions is in the form of a stipulation, wherein, in part, it is set forth that the plaintiff introduced witnesses who testified to facts tending to prove wilful and wanton misconduct on the part of the defendant as alleged in plaintiff’s petition; that the plaintiff and defendant introduced testimony tending to prove that' the defendant was guilty of ordinary negligence only, and that the defendant introduced testimony tending to prove that he was not negligent and was not guilty of wanton and wilful misconduct.

The special charges requested by the parties…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Luisi v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  2. Petersen v. California Cotton Mills Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Patterson v. GarrisonOhio Court of Appeals · 1937
  2. Reed v. Pearl Assurance Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1947
  3. Wappelhorst v. KimmettAllen County Court of Common Pleas · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API