Legal Opinion

Taphorn v. City of Cincinnati

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 14, 1953No. 7805PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHildebrant, J.

The city water main under the sidewalk in front of plaintiffs ’ place of business, known as “Little Misses Sweet Shop,” at No. 2113% Beechmont Avenue, burst, flooding the basement and damaging equipment incident to their candy and ice cream business and other contents thereof. A judgment for plaintiffs entered on a jury verdict is the subject of this appeal on questions of law.

The principal error assigned is the failure of the court to grant defendant’s motions for judgment seasonably made during the trial and for judgment non obstante veredicto.

It is alleged that the main had become worn,…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Grace & Co. (Pacific Coast), a Corporation v. City of Los Angeles, a Municipal CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  2. Republic Light & Furniture Co. v. City of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API