Legal Opinion

Goosmann v. Hitchcock

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 6, 1953No. 213PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

This is an action in which the plaintiff seeks to recover the value of certain goldfish which he alleged he sold to the defendant. The defendant, by his answer, in substance, denied that he bought the goldfish as alleged by the plaintiff, and in explanation of his denial alleged that at the time in question the plaintiff employed him to clean certain ponds containing goldfish under an agreement whereby he was to market the fish taken therefrom and divide the proceeds of sale equally between them. Defendant alleged further that after he had cleaned the ponds and had the fish in baskets or…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Taxicabs of Cincinnati, Inc. v. KohlerOhio Court of Appeals · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API