Hummel v. Hummel
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
It is contended by the plaintiff that the Court of Common Pleas committed prejudicial error in reversing the judgment of the Municipal Court and entering final judgment for defendants, John Hummel and Elizabeth Hummel.
There is considerable conflict in the evidence adduced but in determining the question presented it is only necessary to consider the evidence favorable to the plaintiff, Peter Hummel, Sr., and tending to support the allegations' of the amended bill of particulars upon which the cause was tried in the Municipal Court. The plaintiff fully pleaded all the facts relating to the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Western Assurance Co. v. TowleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- Bowman v. WadeOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Cadman v. MarkleMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Wonsettler v. LeeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- Montague v. GarnettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1867
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by243 opinions
- Hambleton v. R.G. Barry Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
- Johnson v. Microsoft Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2005
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. Jeff Miller StablesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
- Legros v. TarrOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- Olympic Holding Co., L.L.C. v. ACE Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 2009
238 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.