Schwer v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Rd.

Ohio Supreme Court

Schwer v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Rd.

156 Ohio St. (N.S.) 115

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 11, 1951

DocketNo. 32267

StatusPublished

This text of 156 Ohio St. (N.S.) 115 (Schwer v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Rd.) 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

Schwer v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Rd., 156 Ohio St. (N.S.) 115 (Ohio 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The question presented is whether the action of the trial court in granting a new trial amounted to an abuse of discretion. Since the journal entry of the trial court granting the new trial does not disclose on what ground or grounds the motion was allowed, and an examination of the record fails to disclose an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Tart, Matthias, and Hart, JJ., concur. Middleton, J., not participating.

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

Per Curiam.

The question presented is whether the action of the trial court in granting a new trial amounted to an abuse of discretion. Since the journal entry of the trial court granting the new trial does not disclose on what ground or grounds the motion was allowed, and an examination of the record fails to disclose an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Tart, Matthias, and Hart, JJ., concur. Middleton, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 Ohio St. (N.S.) 115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwer-v-new-york-chicago-st-louis-rd-ohio-1951.