Molnar v. Beriswell
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.
The “error in the admission of testimony as to the measure of damages” set forth in the journal entry of the Court of Appeals as one of the grounds upon which it based its reversal of the judgment of the trial court is predicated upon its conclusion, as disclosed by the opinion, that the trial court adopted and applied an erroneous rule as to the measure of damage, and that is the primary question presented to this court. Upon finding that the verdict was excessive the Court of Appeals would have been authorized to reverse the judgment of the trial court upon that ground alone, but for the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ettlinger v. . WeilNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Bunck v. McAulayWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Page v. JohnstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
3Cited by27 opinions
- Burr v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- Shover v. Cordis Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Brewer v. BrothersOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Emery v. Third Nat. Bank of Pbg.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Nickels v. Koehler Management Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1976
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.