Legal Opinion

Buck v. Coblentz

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided July 9, 1934No. 1266PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*3OPINION

By BARNES, J.

We will now take up the several specifications of error and discuss them, but not seriatum. Specification - No. 1 will be discussed first, then followed by 3 and 7 com'bined; followed by 4, then 6, after which 2, 5, 8 and 9 will be grouped.

FIRST GROUND OF ERROR:

“1. At the conclusion and submission of all of the plaintiff’s testimony adduced, and upon his resting his case, the defendant ■ below moved the court to dismiss plaintiff’s 'case on trial, because he, plaintiff, failed to prove the execution or the delivery of the promissory note sued upon; failed to prove the…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Yates v. BatesOhio Court of Appeals · 1941
  2. Credit Equipment Corp. v. SteinerOhio Court of Appeals · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API