Ohio Power Co. v. Fittro, Admx.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtJustice, J.
Many claims of error are presented. A large number of them, however, relate to the same subject-matter, being merely couched in different language. It therefore seems proper to group them, which we have done, and as follows:
1. Refusal of the trial court to order stricken from the amended petition, certain allegations.
2. The sustaining of The Suburban Power Company’s motion for a directed verdict.
3. Damages excessive, appearing to have been given under the influence of passion and prejudice.
4. Misconduct of the jury.
5. Rejection of certain demonstrative evidence.
6. Verdict and judgment…
2Cited by6 opinions
- State v. SheppardOhio Court of Appeals · 1955
- Hiller v. ShawOhio Court of Appeals · 1932
- Short v. Central Louisiana Electric Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1948
- Cox v. WaltzOhio Court of Appeals · 1932
- Joseph v. Ohio Power Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.