Legal Opinion
Toney v. Jenkins
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided December 11, 1933No. 4416PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By HAMILTON, PJ.
It is argued that they have the right to have this question reviewed, notwithstanding the setting aside of the verdict and the granting of the new trial by the trial court.
Defendant in error contends that the overruling of the motion for an instructed verdict is not a final order from which .error could be prosecuted, and no error could be prosecuted from the granting of the new trial.
The decision in the case of Baking Company v Middleton, 118 Oh St, 106, would tend to establish the rule in Ohio that error could be prosecuted from the overruling of the motion for an…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jacob Laub Baking Co. v. MiddletonOhio Supreme Court · 1928
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cincinnati Goodwill Industries v. NeuermanOhio Supreme Court · 1935
- Fulton v. MadlenerOhio Court of Appeals · 1937
- Hesley v. ShawAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
- Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. HaukOhio Court of Appeals · 1943
- Midland Steel Products Co. v. KehoeOhio Court of Appeals · 1934