Mudrich v. Standard Oil Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1DissentHart, J.
It seems to me that the finding and judgment in this case, as reflected by the majority opinion, are not in harmony with certain legal principles heretofore approved and followed with fair consistency by this court in other cases.
As I view it, this situation results from a failure of the court in this case to determine whether the defendant’s liability or immunity from liability was the same as that of a,n occupier of land and whether plain.tiff was a trespasser, licensee, or invitee on the Solka premises.
This court has heretofore consistently held that an occupier of land owes to a…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Oettinger v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Fitzpatrick v. PenfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Moody v. Gufl Refining Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1919
- Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co. v. BinghamOhio Supreme Court · 1876
- Frewen v. PageMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.