Iames v. Cincinnati Street Ry Co.
This text of 10 Ohio Law. Abs. 360 (Iames v. Cincinnati Street Ry Co.) 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
This case comes into this court on error from the Court %of Common Pleas to dismiss-the petition in error.
The sole assignment of. error alleged in the petition in error is:
“There is error in said record and proceedings in this to-wit: That the court was guilty of a gross abuse of judicial discretion in granting a motion for a new trial for defendant in error when it should have been refused.”
The entry granting the motion for a new trial recited that “the verdict of the jury is manifestly against the weight of the evidence.”
There was no other action taken by the court.
There is before this court nothing upon which error proceedings can be predicated. Horseman, et al v Horseman, et al., 85 Oh St, 437. Neuzel v The Village of College Hill, et al, 81 Oh St, 571. Young v Shallenberger, et al, 53 Oh St, 291. Conor v Runnels, 23 Oh St, 601. Beatty v Hatcher, 13 Oh St, 115, 119, 120, 121, 122.
The motion will be granted, and the. petition in error dismissed. >
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 Ohio Law. Abs. 360, 1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/iames-v-cincinnati-street-ry-co-ohioctapp-1931.