DeMaria v. Neth
This text of 7 Ohio Law. Abs. 377 (DeMaria v. Neth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As has been said, there is not a syllable of testimony in the record in reference to said objectionable lines, and there is nothing in the record, except the lines themselves, to suggest any meaning or opinion of the witness or that the jurors probably understood that they were intended to express such opinion of-the witness as is claimed for them; but in any event, from a reading and consideration of the whole record, we are satisfied that if it was error to admit the sketch with the objectionable lines thereon, it was not prejudicial error in this case; and there being no other claim of error, the judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
7 Ohio Law. Abs. 377, 1929 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/demaria-v-neth-ohioctapp-1929.