Brucks v. Weinig
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLemert, J.
It is not our purpose or intention in this opinion to quote at length evidence submitted in the Court below, but suffice it to say that the careful examination of the record discloses that there can be no question in the evidence submitted in the record in the Court below that .thirty six years ago the plaintiff and one Henry W. Enck then owned Lot No. 131 jointly and constructed a brick building on this lot, for business purposes, about fifty feet wide and frontage was ornamented by pilasters of certain design 16 inches wide on each corner, which projected four inches over the main building…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Zaras v. City of FindlayOhio Court of Appeals · 1960
- Boll v. GriffithOhio Court of Appeals · 1987
- McPherson v. Froelich, 21294 (5-4-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007