Cincinnati, Milford & Loveland Traction Co. v. Hatfield

Ohio Supreme Court

Cincinnati, Milford & Loveland Traction Co. v. Hatfield

86 Ohio St. (N.S.) 355

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 4, 1912·No. No. 13023·Published

Opinion

Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed. And this court proceeding to render the judgment which said circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of the court of common pleas be, and the same hereby is,, reversed for the following reasons: First, that said court erred in the admission of hearsay from the witnesses Cherry and Johnson; and, second, because of the misconduct of counsel for the prevailing party in addressing the jury.

Davis, C. J., Spear, Shauck and O’Hara, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed. And this court proceeding to render the judgment which said circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of the court of common pleas be, and the same hereby is,, reversed for the following reasons: First, that said court erred in the admission of hearsay from the witnesses Cherry and Johnson; and, second, because of the misconduct of counsel for the prevailing party in addressing the jury.

Davis, C. J., Spear, Shauck and O’Hara, JJ., concur.

Cincinnati, Milford & Loveland Traction Co. v. Hatfield, 86 Ohio St. (N.S.) 355 (Ohio 1912).

Pincite

86 Ohio St. (N.S.) 355 (Cincinnati, Milford & Loveland Traction Co. v. Hatfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.