De Shetler v. Kordt
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLloyd, J.
As we gather them from the record, the foregoing are the facts to which we are to direct our attention in determining the questions presented by the petition in error.
The accident having happened in Michigan and the law of that state as defendant claims it to be having been pleaded in his answer, and evidence thereof having been received at the trial, we must apply the law of that state to- the facts in evidence. The plaintiff’s alleged cause of action is thus stated in his amended petition:
“That the defendant was guilty of gross negligence and wilful and wanton misconduct directly and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Naudzius v. LahrMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Gibbard v. CursanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Union Trust Co. v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
- Montgomery v. Muskegon Booming Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Simon v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
3Cited by18 opinions
- Lankford v. IwongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
- Thornsbury v. ThornsburyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1963
- Boos v. SauerMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
- Smith v. WilliamsOregon Supreme Court · 1947
- Manser v. EderMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.