Legal Opinion

Barber v. Khilken

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided June 25, 1934No. 2952PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By WILLIAMS, J.

The trial court refused to permit the plaintiff Barber to testify except to facts which occurred after the death of the decedent in accordance with the provisions of §11495, GC. This section contains the provision that “nothing in this section shall apply to actions for causing death.” The contention of plaintiff in error is that by reason of the fact that the defendant filed a cross-petition for wrongful death, there was a waiver of the “incompetency” of the plaintiff to testify. It will be observed that §11495, GC, does not make a party an incompetent witness but…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Dickerhoff v. AtheyOhio Court of Appeals · 1947
  2. Sprung v. E. I. Dupont de Nemours & Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API