Legal Opinion
Abrams v. Clark
Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division
Decided February 6, 1957No. 191072PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By BARTLETT, J.
MOTION OF PLAINTIFF FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED PETITION OVERRULED IN PART AND SUSTAINED IN PART.
Motion by plaintiff for leave to file an amended petition by amendments as follows:
I. By adding the words, “due to his intoxicated state at the time,” on to specification of negligence No. 2 of the petition, which avers:
“(2) in failing to have the automobile he was driving under control.”
Leave to so amend is denied. Specification No. 2 in its present form is sufficient. Harris v. Webb, 22 N. P. (n. s.) 359, 360; Ballenger v. Sheward et al., No. 169,803, and Berry v. Jackson,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Laxton v. HayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Alliance Insurance v. PorrisOhio Court of Appeals · 1924
- Holland Furnace Co. v. StevensonOhio Court of Appeals · 1930
3Cited by4 opinions
- Baramore v. WashingMontgomery County Court of Common Pleas · 1959
- House v. MoomawOhio Court of Appeals · 1964
- Myers v. Wilson, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1960
- Shull v. Simpson, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1967