Johnson v. Citizens National Bank
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.
This is another of the rather frequent cases in which there is no dispute as to either the law or the controlling facts. The controversy lies in the application of the pertinent law to the particular facts.
Ohio follows the fundamental common-law rule that in an ordinary tort action the injured plaintiff may not recover from the defendant, even though negligent, if the plaintiff, too, was guilty of negligence proximately contributing to cause his own injury. 29 Ohio Jurisprudence, 501, Section 83.
In the majority opinion of the Court of Appeals in the instant case it is stated that “the most…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. LautermilchOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- Flury v. Central Publishing House of Reformed Church in the United StatesOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- McKinley v. NiederstOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- Auferheide v. ThalOhio Court of Appeals · 1945
3Cited by16 opinions
- Jeswald v. HuttOhio Supreme Court · 1968
- Mundt v. Ragnar Benson, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1975
- Logsdon v. Main-Nottingham Investment Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1956
- Bridges v. HillmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Helvich v. George A. Rutherford Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.