Kauther v. Vigransky

Hamilton Circuit Court

Kauther v. Vigransky

12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 48, 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 261

Hamilton Circuit Court·Decided December 19, 1908·Published

Opinion

Upon examination of the record in -above case -the court is of the opinion that the verdict is fully sustained by the evidence. The evidence does not substantiate the claim of plaintiff in error as set up in the petition, that defendants were his agents and that fraud was practiced upon him. On the contrary, he emphatically denies such relationship and practically admits the claim of defendants in error.

Any errors of law that may exist, if in fact any such do exist, are therefore not prejudicial- to plaintiff in error and the judgment of the trial court is -affirmed.

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

Upon examination of the record in -above case -the court is of the opinion that the verdict is fully sustained by the evidence. The evidence does not substantiate the claim of plaintiff in error as set up in the petition, that defendants were his agents and that fraud was practiced upon him. On the contrary, he emphatically denies such relationship and practically admits the claim of defendants in error.

Any errors of law that may exist, if in fact any such do exist, are therefore not prejudicial- to plaintiff in error and the judgment of the trial court is -affirmed.

Kauther v. Vigransky, 12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 48, 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 261 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1908).

Pincite

12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 48 (Kauther v. Vigransky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.