Pettibone v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles

Ohio Court of Appeals

Pettibone v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles

320 N.E.2d 674, 40 Ohio App. 2d 451, 69 Ohio Op. 2d 390, 1974 Ohio App. LEXIS 2657

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 23, 1974

Docket312

StatusPublished

This text of 320 N.E.2d 674 (Pettibone v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles) 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.

Bluebook

Pettibone v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, 320 N.E.2d 674, 40 Ohio App. 2d 451, 69 Ohio Op. 2d 390, 1974 Ohio App. LEXIS 2657 (Ohio Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Gray, J.

This cause is in this court on appeal from a judgment entered by the Municipal Court of Cireleville. Plaintiff was arrested for driving a motor vehicle while •under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He refused to take the chemical test required in R. C. 4511.191. The Registrar of Motor Vehicles, upon the sworn report of the arresting officer, suspended his driving license. Plaintiff filed his complaint in the Municipal Court of Cireleville to test the vahdity of the revocation of his license. A trial was had. At the conclusion of the trial the court held:

“The petitioner having failed to show error in the action taken by the Registrar or in one or more of the four matters within the scope of the hearing, the petition is denied and the petitioner’s driver license and/or driving privilege is, therefore, suspended for a period of six months *452 effective March 20, 1973 and the cost of these proceedings shall be paid by the petitioner. LICENSE(S) ............ ATTACHED. Limited driving rights to drive to and from work extended to petitioner. (To which the prosecuting attorney for Pickaway County accepts to limited driving privileges.) ”

Defendant prosecuted error to this court. We find that prejudicial error intervened in the rendition of judgment in this case in that the Municipal Court of Circleville had no authority to give limited driving rights to drive to and from work to petitioner.

Therefore, the judgment herein is reversed and this cause is remanded to the Municipal Court of Circleville for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Judgment reversed.

Stephenson, P. J., and Abeee, J., concur.

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

Gray, J.

This cause is in this court on appeal from a judgment entered by the Municipal Court of Cireleville. Plaintiff was arrested for driving a motor vehicle while •under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He refused to take the chemical test required in R. C. 4511.191. The Registrar of Motor Vehicles, upon the sworn report of the arresting officer, suspended his driving license. Plaintiff filed his complaint in the Municipal Court of Cireleville to test the vahdity of the revocation of his license. A trial was had. At the conclusion of the trial the court held:

“The petitioner having failed to show error in the action taken by the Registrar or in one or more of the four matters within the scope of the hearing, the petition is denied and the petitioner’s driver license and/or driving privilege is, therefore, suspended for a period of six months *452 effective March 20, 1973 and the cost of these proceedings shall be paid by the petitioner. LICENSE(S) ............ ATTACHED. Limited driving rights to drive to and from work extended to petitioner. (To which the prosecuting attorney for Pickaway County accepts to limited driving privileges.) ”

Defendant prosecuted error to this court. We find that prejudicial error intervened in the rendition of judgment in this case in that the Municipal Court of Circleville had no authority to give limited driving rights to drive to and from work to petitioner.

Therefore, the judgment herein is reversed and this cause is remanded to the Municipal Court of Circleville for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Judgment reversed.

Stephenson, P. J., and Abeee, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

320 N.E.2d 674, 40 Ohio App. 2d 451, 69 Ohio Op. 2d 390, 1974 Ohio App. LEXIS 2657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pettibone-v-bureau-of-motor-vehicles-ohioctapp-1974.