Legal Opinion

The Higbee Co. v. Holmes

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided February 3, 1933No. 12960PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBlosser, J.

The question is not without difficulty. The trial court may have considered that the defendant did not use ordinary care in this: that while the store had been visited by hundreds and thousands of people daily this was the plaintiff’s first visit and that having seen that the store generally was illuminated by indirect light she would not expect to encounter the direct rays and glare of a powerful light as she entered the basement and had no warning of the same; that had all the lights been direct or uniform she may not have been misled, and as testified by one of the experts good practice…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Paragon Refining Co. v. HigbeaOhio Court of Appeals · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Snodgrass v. Turner Tourist Hotels, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API