Legal Opinion

Barber v. State

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 15, 1927PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF COURT

The following is taken, verbatim, from the opinion.

MAUCK, J.

One of the assignments of error relates to the application and interpretation of the language just quoted. It is contended that Sned-den was neither a pedestrain nor driver or oc*782cupant of another vehicle and that he was not a person then in the lawful use of the roads or highways, and consequently that there was no violation on the part of the accused if the latter so operated his automobile as to endanger the life of Sncdden. We can not give to this section the restricted interpietation contended for. Snedden was in…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Masoncup v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1933
  2. State v. WellsOhio Supreme Court · 1943
  3. State v. WellsOhio Supreme Court · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API