Foos v. Teeters
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtRichards, J.
The trial judge, after the rendition of the verdict, refused to assign the case against Teeters for trial, and error is prosecuted to that action., A judgment against one joint tort feasor is not a bar to an action against the other, unless the judgment has been satisfied. Therefore, Colletta Foos is entitled to have her action against John D. Teeters tried in the court of common pleas unless, in the meantime, she should receive satisfaction on her judgment against Hammer. The record fails to disclose any final judgment for or against Teeters and for this reason the petition in error in case…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Dow Drug Co. v. NiemanOhio Court of Appeals · 1936
- Olsen v. Eastern Automobile Forwarding Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1939
- Strassner v. D'AtriOhio Court of Appeals · 1933
- Strassner v. D'AtriOhio Court of Appeals · 1932