Beerman v. City of Kettering
235 N.E.2d 231, 13 Ohio St. 2d 149, 42 Ohio Op. 2d 371, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 484
Opinion
This court finds itself in the same predicament as did the Court of Appeals. There is no bill of exceptions and no findings of fact and conclusions of law by the trial court.
In entertaining the appeal we were not fully aware of the situation as it has developed. For the reason stated, we cannot reach the merits of the controversy, and we' are constrained to affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Beerman v. City of Kettering, 235 N.E.2d 231, 13 Ohio St. 2d 149, 42 Ohio Op. 2d 371, 1968 Ohio LEXIS 484 (Ohio 1968).
235 N.E.2d 231 (Beerman v. City of Kettering) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
New York State Higher Education Services Corp. v. Brock (In Re Brock)
4 B.R. 491 (S.D. New York, 1980)