Legal Opinion

Kuhn v. Zabotsky

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1967No. 40141PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Neill, J.

In answer to the allegation in plaintiff’s petition that as a result of the negligence of the defendant the defendant’s car struck the plaintiff’s car in the rear, the defendant filed an answer which alleges that ‘ ‘ * * * defendant * * * admits that about the time and place set forth in plaintiff’s petition there was a collision between automobiles being operated by the parties hereto,” and denies all other allegations.

During the trial, over objection of the plaintiff, the defendant was permitted to amend his answer, which amendment added the following allegation: “ * * * that at the time of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Spalding v. WaxlerOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Bird v. HartOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Stump v. PhilliansOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  4. City of Kettering v. GreeneOhio Supreme Court · 1966

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Preferred Risk Insurance v. GillOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Creasy v. RuskIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Roman v. Estate of GobboOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Sharp v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State v. CurryOhio Supreme Court · 1989

5 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