Legal Opinion

Colarossi v. Anderson Concrete Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1963No. 37852Published

1Opinion of the CourtGkcetith, J.

When the conduct of a party is once ascertained, the question whether it came up to the standard of reasonable care prescribed by the law ordinarily must be decided as a matter of fact. Only in clear eases can it be ruled on as a matter of law.

At the conclusion of plaintiff’s case, was there not presented a question of whether the defendant, under all the attending circumstances, exercised ordinary care toward the plaintiff ?

The driver of defendant’s truck, who was thoroughly familiar with the construction area in the project by having previously made other deliveries of concrete, testified,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. Hamden Lodge No. 517 v. Ohio Fuel Gas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Lisle v. AndersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Tanzi v. New York Central R. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Rockey v. ErnestSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951

6 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