Gilvary v. Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Gilvary v. Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co.

188 N.E. 4, 127 Ohio St. 402, 127 Ohio St. (N.S.) 402, 1933 Ohio LEXIS 292

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided October 25, 1933·No. 23947·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

It appearing that the judges of the court are equally divided in opinion as to the merits of this ease (one judge not participating) and are for that reason unable to agree upon a judgment, and the entry of that fact constituting an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, it is ordered that said judgment be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Jones, Matthias and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Weygandt, C. J., not participating.

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

It appearing that the judges of the court are equally divided in opinion as to the merits of this ease (one judge not participating) and are for that reason unable to agree upon a judgment, and the entry of that fact constituting an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, it is ordered that said judgment be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Jones, Matthias and Zimmerman, JJ., concur. Weygandt, C. J., not participating.

Gilvary v. Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co., 188 N.E. 4, 127 Ohio St. 402, 127 Ohio St. (N.S.) 402, 1933 Ohio LEXIS 292 (Ohio 1933).

Pincite

188 N.E. 4 (Gilvary v. Cuyahoga Valley Ry. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related