Jalkanson v. Am. Construction Co.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Jalkanson v. Am. Construction Co.

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 567, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1692

Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided June 18, 1923·No. No. 4438·Published

Opinion

VICKERY, J.

The Court of Appeals decided:

This ease was held in abeyance by this court, inasmuch as there were suits pending in the Supreme Court which involved this question, and we would have been compelled to confirm the court below, on the authority of the Patten case, but since that court has overruled the doctrine laid down in the Patten and kindred cases, and held that there was a liability in cases similar to the one at bar, we are compelled to reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the case to the Common Pleas Court, basing our decision upon the authority of the case of the Ohio Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Fender)'25 Abs. 467.

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

VICKERY, J.

The Court of Appeals decided:

This ease was held in abeyance by this court, inasmuch as there were suits pending in the Supreme Court which involved this question, and we would have been compelled to confirm the court below, on the authority of the Patten case, but since that court has overruled the doctrine laid down in the Patten and kindred cases, and held that there was a liability in cases similar to the one at bar, we are compelled to reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the case to the Common Pleas Court, basing our decision upon the authority of the case of the Ohio Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Fender)'25 Abs. 467.

Jalkanson v. Am. Construction Co., 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 567, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1692 (Ohio Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 567 (Jalkanson v. Am. Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related