Legal Opinion

Scott v. Canton Motor Coach, Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 4, 1938PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSherick, J.

As a result of a personal injury growing out of an automobile collision, the plaintiff recovered a sizable verdict by the unanimous approval of a jury. Within three days thereafter the defendant moved for a new trial upon seven grounds, as set forth in its motion. Twelve days thereafter and before a hearing was had thereon, it filed a supplemental motion for a new trial and alleged therein an eighth ground, which recited “for misconduct on the part of the juror Robert Kuhn on his voir dire- examination # # # >>

Plaintiff thereupon moved that the supplemental motion be stricken from the files.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. The Wheeling Lake Erie Ry. Co. v. RichterOhio Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. MyersOhio Court of Appeals · 1935
  3. Cincinnati Trac. Co. v. MastersOhio Court of Appeals · 1923

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. WaldenOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Witkowski v. WelchCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API