Legal Opinion

Babbitt v. Say

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1929No. 21426PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.

There are three major grounds of error urged in this case: First, that the court should have directed a verdict upon the question of the contributory negligence of the plaintiff’s decedent; second, that the court erred in not admitting the written statement of the witness Isaman, made before the trial, to a representative of an insurance company acting on behalf of the plaintiff in error, Babbitt; third, it is claimed by plaintiff in error that there is no liability on the part of the owner of an automobile truck which, with its driver, is hired to a third party on an hourly basis, because…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Little v. HackettSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Driscoll v. TowleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
  4. Charles v. . BarrettNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
  5. Shepard v. JacobsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Losito v. Kruse, Jr.Ohio Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Lee Moor Contracting Co. v. BlantonArizona Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Briggs v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  4. Kelley v. Summers Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v. Kelley (Two Cases). Kelley v. MartinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954
  5. Patterson v. CushmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1964

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API