History
  • No items yet
midpage
Woodward v. Hafely
20 Ohio Law. Abs. 256
Ohio Ct. App.
1935
Check Treatment

OPINION

By WASHBURN, J.

Counsel are familiar with the facts in this case and the questions involved, and we shall conserve time by not making any statement with reierence thereto.

We hold that, under the statutes of the state, the Common Pleas Court of Lorain County had jurisdiction, on appeal from the judgment rendered in this case in the Municipal Court of the city of Lorain, and fhat the law with reference to appeals from justice of the peace courts applies to the procedure in perfecting such appeal.

We have read and considered the evidence taken upon the trial of the case in the Common Pleas Court, and are of the opinion that the judgment of said court is not manifestly against the weight of the evidence; and our investigation of cite record leads us to the conclusion that there was no prejudicial error committed in the trial of the case.

The judgment of the Common Pleas Court is therefore affirmed.

FUNK, PJ, and STEVENS, J, concur in judgment.

Case Details

Case Name: Woodward v. Hafely
Court Name: Ohio Court of Appeals
Date Published: Nov 8, 1935
Citation: 20 Ohio Law. Abs. 256
Docket Number: No 760
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.