State v. Mandery

Hamilton Circuit Court

State v. Mandery

20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 832

DecidedAugust 1, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 832 (State v. Mandery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Mandery, 20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 832 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

JELKE, P. J.

We are of opinion that the trial court erred in directing the verdict at the close of all the testimony.

The issue of fact as to whether the specific property was included in and part of the original canal property of the state should have been submitted to the jury — there was enough testimony to require this.

[833]*833The court’s view of the law was erroneous and not in accord with State v. Railway, 53 Ohio St. 189 [41 N. E. Rep. 205], et seq.

Judgment reversed.

Giffen a,nd Swing, JJ., concur.

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