History
  • No items yet
midpage
Goldstein v. Abbot
1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1519
Ohio Ct. App.
1931
Check Treatment
CROW, J.

It is pot necessary to quote from cases f>r -oth,er • authorities the basic principles underlying the doctrine of res adjudicata; it is quite sufficient to say that whatever material questions were in issue in a former suit and there determined, as well as every other question which might properly have been litigated in the case, will' be conclusively deemed at an end so far as future judicial inquiry is concerned.

Manifestly the question of negligence as between Goldstein and Abbot could not have been properly determined in the first suit, the only matter there being, as we have said, the liability of Goldstein ,and Abbot as joint wrongdoers, to Marshall.

The Municipal Court was clearly in error in admitting the evidence of the adjudication in the first case and that error being prejudicial, the judgment must be reversed at the cost of defendant in error, and the cause remanded for a new trial or other proper proceeding.

Middleton, PJ, and Justice, J, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Goldstein v. Abbot
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Feb 2, 1931
Citation: 1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1519
Docket Number: No 11124
Court Abbreviation: Ohio Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.