Legal Opinion

Manigault v. Ford Motor Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 2002No. 2000-2299 & 2001-0203PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 96 Ohio St.3d 431.] MANIGAULT ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, APPELLEE, ET AL. [Cite as Manigault v. Ford Motor Co.,

2002-Ohio-5057.] Evidence—Witnesses—New trial is the appropriate remedy when an expert witness’s testimony accompanying a videotape without audio is allegedly contradicted by a copy of the videotape with audio, even when the videotape with audio is not discovered until after the trial has been completed. (Nos. 2000-2299 and 2001-0203—Submitted January 29, 2002—Decided October 9, 2002.) APPEAL from the Court…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. DehassOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Noble v. ColwellOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Mannion v. SandelOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Lamar v. MarburyOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Manigault v. Ford Motor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Aaa All City Heating v. New World Comm., Unpublished Decision (10-21-2004)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. State v. DewOhio Court of Appeals · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API