Legal Opinion

Page v. Wieland, Recr.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 10, 1940No. 27921PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

"Williams, J.

The questions presented are procedural and arise out of the failure of the trial court to rule on defendant’s objection to the ordinances on the ground of incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, and the omission of such ordinances from the bill of exceptions as a part of the evidence.

Were the ordinances a part of the record?

Since the ordinances were set out in full in the second amended petition, the admissions by the defendant by which he signified that he made no question regarding the ordinance provisions except as to their admissibility, obviated the necessity of putting…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Orose v. Hodge Drive-It-Yourself Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Louisville & Nashville Rd. v. GreeneOhio Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Herrell v. HickokOhio Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hooper v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1968
  2. City of Toledo v. KohlhoferOhio Court of Appeals · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API