Legal Opinion

Kerruish v. Cleveland & S. Brew. Co.

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Decided May 15, 1911Published

Error.

1Opinion of the CourtHenry, J.

The parties to this proceeding in error stand here as they stood below. There the defendant had a verdict and judgment on both causes of action set up in plaintiff’s second amended petition, viz: first, for damages for the failure of the defendant, as lessee of plaintiff’s three-story brick saloon and dwelling, located at and known as Number 15 Central viaduct, in the city of Cleveland, for the term of three years, ending February 28, 1906, to deliver up and. surrender to the plaintiff and his heirs possession of said premises at the expiration of the term aforesaid, in as good condition and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Haynes v. . AldrichNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Campau v. MichellMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Sullivan v. George Ringler & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
  4. Sullivan v. . George Ringler CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. Dimock v. Van BergenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1866

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

Powered by the Exa API