Lawrence Electric Co. v. Enterprise Lumber Co.

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

Lawrence Electric Co. v. Enterprise Lumber Co.

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 539, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1617

CourtOhio Superior Court, Cincinnati

DecidedJuly 9, 1923

DocketNo. 58453

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 539 (Lawrence Electric Co. v. Enterprise Lumber Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lawrence Electric Co. v. Enterprise Lumber Co., 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 539, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1617 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

MARX, J.

Epitomized Opinion

This case involved an irregular street intersection caused by a jog in Linco’n avenue where it intersects Park avenue with the' result that the north side of Lincoln west of Park is about opposite the south side of Lincoln east of Park. The city ordinance, Sec. 680 (2) 9, reads:

Any vehicle turning into another street to the left, shall pass to the right of any beyond the center of the street intersection before turning.”

At the first trial the center of this street intersection was held by the court as a matter of law to be the point of intersection of the center line of Park and the diagonal line connecting the two points where the center lines of Lincoln east and west of Park intersect the east and west sides of Park. In setting aside the verdict of the first trial the court reversed this position and held that the center of the street intersection was thé point of intersection of Park and the center line of Lincoln to the west of Park extended.

In the second trial this court took the position that the center of such irregular street intersection could not be determined as a matter of law but must in the nature of things be determined by the jury as a question of fact keeping; in mind the purpose of the ordinance. In leaving the matter to the jury with a statement of the purpose of the ordinance the court believes it worked out a common sense rule which gives full force and effect to the ordinance.

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

MARX, J.

Epitomized Opinion

This case involved an irregular street intersection caused by a jog in Linco’n avenue where it intersects Park avenue with the' result that the north side of Lincoln west of Park is about opposite the south side of Lincoln east of Park. The city ordinance, Sec. 680 (2) 9, reads:

Any vehicle turning into another street to the left, shall pass to the right of any beyond the center of the street intersection before turning.”

At the first trial the center of this street intersection was held by the court as a matter of law to be the point of intersection of the center line of Park and the diagonal line connecting the two points where the center lines of Lincoln east and west of Park intersect the east and west sides of Park. In setting aside the verdict of the first trial the court reversed this position and held that the center of the street intersection was thé point of intersection of Park and the center line of Lincoln to the west of Park extended.

In the second trial this court took the position that the center of such irregular street intersection could not be determined as a matter of law but must in the nature of things be determined by the jury as a question of fact keeping; in mind the purpose of the ordinance. In leaving the matter to the jury with a statement of the purpose of the ordinance the court believes it worked out a common sense rule which gives full force and effect to the ordinance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 539, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-electric-co-v-enterprise-lumber-co-ohsuperctcinci-1923.