Viering v. Scott.

Ohio Supreme Court

Viering v. Scott.

88 N.E.2d 921, 152 Ohio St. 211, 152 Ohio St. (N.S.) 211, 40 Ohio Op. 220, 1949 Ohio LEXIS 350

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 9, 1949

Docket31775

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 88 N.E.2d 921 (Viering v. Scott.) 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

Viering v. Scott., 88 N.E.2d 921, 152 Ohio St. 211, 152 Ohio St. (N.S.) 211, 40 Ohio Op. 220, 1949 Ohio LEXIS 350 (Ohio 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

The cause is before this court on a motion to dismiss the appeal or to affirm the decree for the reasons that no bill of exceptions was prepared and filéd in the Court of Appeals pursuant to Section 11564, General Code, and that the errors assigned and legal questions thereby raised are not sufficiently or adequately presented for review by the record filed in this court.

The present record does not contain either a bill of *213 exceptions prepared in the Court of Appeals, a finding of facts by that court or a stipulation by counsel to try the case de novo in the Court of Appeals upon a bill of exceptions prepared in the Court of Common Pleas.

The case being in this court after the allowance of a motion to certify the record and there being an insufficient record to review the errors assigned, the decree of the Court of Appeals is affirmed on authority of DeMoss v. Conart Motor Sales, Inc., 149 Ohio St., 299, 78 N. E. (2d), 675.

Decree affirmed.

Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Taet, JJ., concur. Weygandt, C. J., not participating.

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