Legal Opinion

Wolf v. Marshall

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1929No. 21321PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKinkade, J.

This is an action to recover for professional services rendered. The jury returned a verdict against the plaintiffs in error here for the full amount claimed. A motion for new trial was overruled, and judgment entered on the verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The plaintiffs in error prosecute error to this court.

When the case was called for trial in the common pleas court, the defendants presented an affidavit of prejudice against the trial judge, which had been filed that day, and asked that the case be assigned for hearing before some other judge. The…

2Cited by17 opinions

  1. State v. MaysOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  2. State v. NeilArizona Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Cuyahoga County Bd. of Mental Retardation v. Association of Cuyahoga County Teachers of the Trainable RetardedOhio Court of Appeals · 1975
  4. State v. PayneOhio Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. Demers v. GeretyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978

12 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