Ronald Routledge v. Louis Chaitoff

Sixth Circuit

Ronald Routledge v. Louis Chaitoff

286 F.2d 249, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 2976

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedDecember 21, 1960

Docket14188

StatusPublished

This text of 286 F.2d 249 (Ronald Routledge v. Louis Chaitoff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ronald Routledge v. Louis Chaitoff, 286 F.2d 249, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 2976 (6th Cir. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER.

This is an appeal from the District Court of the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio. The parties were involved in a collision between the plaintiff-appellant’s motorcycle and the defendant-appellee’s automobile, on Ohio State Route 84, near Cleveland. The case was tried to a jury on the issue of which party crossed the center line of the highway onto his left side of the road. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant and judgment was entered accordingly.

The appeal was submitted to this Court on the record and briefs and oral arguments of counsel. Three assignments of error were presented to the Court, all of which relate to the admission and rejection of evidence.

Upon a review of the evidence relating to the questions involved and upon consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of counsel, we find that under all of the facts and circumstances of this case there is no prejudicial error in the record.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the District Court be and it is hereby affirmed.

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

ORDER.

This is an appeal from the District Court of the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio. The parties were involved in a collision between the plaintiff-appellant’s motorcycle and the defendant-appellee’s automobile, on Ohio State Route 84, near Cleveland. The case was tried to a jury on the issue of which party crossed the center line of the highway onto his left side of the road. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant and judgment was entered accordingly.

The appeal was submitted to this Court on the record and briefs and oral arguments of counsel. Three assignments of error were presented to the Court, all of which relate to the admission and rejection of evidence.

Upon a review of the evidence relating to the questions involved and upon consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of counsel, we find that under all of the facts and circumstances of this case there is no prejudicial error in the record.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the District Court be and it is hereby affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 F.2d 249, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 2976, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ronald-routledge-v-louis-chaitoff-ca6-1960.