Legal Opinion

Bradley v. Cleveland Ry. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 3, 1925No. 18511PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

The printed record contains none of the evidence offered at the trial but does contain the complete charge of the court. In that aspect, while the issue of contributory negligence was not made in the answer, it may have been presented in the evidence offered in the trial. Counsel for plaintiff in error insists that the trial court erred in charging upon that issue, by instructing the jury that if they found that plain tiff’s failure to use ordinary care contributed to her injury she could not recover. In support of this insistence he cites Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Forrest, 73 Ohio St., 1,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Gibbs v. Scioto Valley Ry. & Power Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Hanna v. StollOhio Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Central States Stamping Co. v. Terminal Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
  3. Cleveland-Akron Bag Co. v. JaiteOhio Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Central States Stamping Company v. Terminal Equipment Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
  5. Hicks v. CramerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1929

18 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