Village of New London v. Starbird

Ohio Supreme Court

Village of New London v. Starbird

147 N.E. 912, 112 Ohio St. 564, 112 Ohio St. (N.S.) 564, 1925 Ohio LEXIS 317

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 21, 1925

Docket18621

StatusPublished

This text of 147 N.E. 912 (Village of New London v. Starbird) 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

Village of New London v. Starbird, 147 N.E. 912, 112 Ohio St. 564, 112 Ohio St. (N.S.) 564, 1925 Ohio LEXIS 317 (Ohio 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

In the foregoing case Jones, Matthias and Day, JJ., reach the conclusion that no prejudicial error has intervened and that the judgment of the court below should be affirmed.

Marshall, C. J., and Allen and Robinson, JJ., are of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed.

Kinkade, J., having been a member of the Court of Appeals that heard and decided this case, and whose record is now before this court for consideration, does not participate herein.

For the foregoing reasons, there not being four judges that have reached a common conclusion, it follows that, there not being a majority of the *565 court in favor of reversal, the judgment of the Court of Appeals stands affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Jones, Matthias and Day, JJ., concur. Kinkade, J., not participating.

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