Legal Opinion

Davies v. Seasley

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 9, 1934PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*608OPINION

By LYNCH, J.

We observe that quite often the question here presented is not raised in actions of this character, but when raised it becomes the duty of the court to determine whether there is a misjoinder of parties defendant, and whether different causes of action are improperly joined. We have read with care the briefs filed in this case, but find, after carefully examining the cases cited by plaintiff in error, that the same are not determinative of the question here involved. We further observe that all of the decisions of the Court of Appeals cited in said brief are prior in time…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Logsdon v. Main-Nottingham Investment Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1956
  2. Hudson v. Ohio Bus Line Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1937
  3. Tishler v. Taxicabs of Cincinnati, Inc., Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1938
  4. Logsdon v. Main-Nottingham Investment Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API