Legal Opinion

Baker v. Pendergast

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1877Published

Error, to the District Court of Cuyahoga county. The original action was brought in the Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga county by defendant in error, to recover damages of the plaintiff in error for driving his horse attached to a sleigh, along Euclid street, in the city of Cleveland, so negligently and carelessly as to strike and run over the defendant with the said horse and sleigh, thereby greatly injuring him.

Read the full summary

Error, to the District Court of Cuyahoga county. The original action was brought in the Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga county by defendant in error, to recover damages of the plaintiff in error for driving his horse attached to a sleigh, along Euclid street, in the city of Cleveland, so negligently and carelessly as to strike and run over the defendant with the said horse and sleigh, thereby greatly injuring him. The defendant below answered, denying the carelessness and negligence charged against him, and alleging that the injuries and damage of which the plaintiff complained were the…

1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.

Bid the court of common pleas err in permitting the city ordinance, which prohibits the driving of horses at a rate of speed exceeding six miles an hour, to be offered in evidencé by the plaintiff in that court ? It was offered and permitted to go to the jury for one purpose only. That purpose was, that it might be considered by the jury in determining whether the plaintiff was guilty of such contributory negligence as would prevent a recovery. It was offered solely to relieve the plaintiff from the charge of negligence in attempting to cross the street in the manner he did at the time when…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Vairin v. Canal InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1840
  2. Marietta & Cincinnati R. R. v. Strader & Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1876

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

Powered by the Exa API