Legal Opinion

Steinle v. City of Cincinnati

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1944No. 29600PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtZimmerman, J.

No error was committed by the Court of Appeals in its holding on the procedural question. The trial court made no complete and final disposition of the matter in plaintiff’s favor until its finding of October 29, 1942, which was filed for journalization on that date and the motion for a new trial filed within three days afterwards was within time. See In re Estate of Lowry, 140 Ohio St., 223, 42 N. E. (2d), 987; State, ex rel. Curran, v. Brookes, Jr., 142 Ohio St., 107, 50 N. E. (2d), 995.

The generally accepted rule appears to be that in the trial of a cause to the court without the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smith v. Erie Rd. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1938
  2. City of Norwood v. SheenOhio Supreme Court · 1933
  3. State Ex Rel. Curran v. BrookesOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  4. In Re Estate of LowryOhio Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Southern Colonization Co. v. Howard Cole & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1925

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Doud v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Burt Realty Corp. v. City of ColumbusOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Seringetti Construction Co. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
  4. Ex Parte SimpsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 2009
  5. Brooks Investment Co. v. City of BloomingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975

12 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