Legal Opinion

Di Gildo v. Caponi

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1969No. 68-83PublishedCited by 115 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchneider, J.

Appellant argues that infancy cannot vary a social host’s duty to his guests, and that the facts in this case show no violation of a landoccupier’s duty to his infant social guest, as a matter of law. We do not agree and, therefore, affirm.

*127Liability for negligence is predicated upon injury caused by the failure to discharge a duty owed to the injured party. Feldman v. Howard, 10 Ohio St. 2d 189; Grossnickle v. Germantown, 3 Ohio St. 2d 96, 103; Schell v. DuBois, 94 Ohio St. 93; 39 Ohio Jurisprudence 2d 482, Negligence, Section 2.

The amount of care required of a person to establish whether he…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Johnson v. Wagner Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Neff Lumber Co. v. First National BankOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Schell v. DuBoisOhio Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by115 opinions

  1. Menifee v. Ohio Welding Products, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Mussivand v. DavidOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Strother v. HutchinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Simmers v. Bentley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Texler v. D.O. Summers Cleaners & Shirt Laundry Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998

110 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