Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. Lautermilch

Ohio Supreme Court

Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. Lautermilch

6 Ohio Law. Abs. 158

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 29, 1928

DocketNo. 20423

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Ohio Law. Abs. 158 (Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. Lautermilch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. Lautermilch, 6 Ohio Law. Abs. 158 (Ohio 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

ROBINSON, J.

Whenever, froir conflicting- evidence of the same witness or of different witnesses, it becomes necessary to weigh such conflicting evidence to determine wherein the probable truth lies, or from a combination of cricumstances determine an ultimate fact upon the determination of which different minds might reasonably arrive at different conclusions, it is the province of the jury to perform that function. It is reversible error for the court to invade that province of the jury.

(Day, Allen and Matthias, JJ., concur.)

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

ROBINSON, J.

Whenever, froir conflicting- evidence of the same witness or of different witnesses, it becomes necessary to weigh such conflicting evidence to determine wherein the probable truth lies, or from a combination of cricumstances determine an ultimate fact upon the determination of which different minds might reasonably arrive at different conclusions, it is the province of the jury to perform that function. It is reversible error for the court to invade that province of the jury.

(Day, Allen and Matthias, JJ., concur.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Ohio Law. Abs. 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/painesville-utopia-theatre-co-v-lautermilch-ohio-1928.