Legal Opinion

Dunaway v. Torline

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided October 29, 1951No. 7462PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By MATTHEWS, J.:

This action to recover under the Price Control Act, (Sec. 205 of United States Public Laws, passed by Eightieth Congress) because of an alleged rental charge in excess of the maximum fixed under Section 204 of that Act, was begun by George Dunaway and Dolores Dunaway. There have been two trials, resulting in each instance in a verdict against the defendants.

At the first trial, it developed that George Dunaway was a minor at the time the action was filed and at the time of trial. Inasmuch as George, Dunaway had not acted through a next friend or guardian ad litem, the…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Payton v. RehbergOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
  2. Huff v. SpruanceFayette County Court of Common Pleas · 1953
  3. Winwood v. SturgeonOhio Court of Appeals · 1955
  4. Hunt v. Rohrbaugh Enterprises, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Wright v. YoukilisOhio Court of Appeals · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API