Opinion

Karun v. State, Department of Liquor Control

  • 81 Ohio Law. Abs. 509
  • 162 N.E.2d 625
  • 1959 Ohio App. LEXIS 993
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Filed
Apr 14, 1959
Status
Published
Author
Fess
On the bench
Bryant, Duffy, Fess, Sixth, Tenth
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 15.0%

The opinion

CONCURRING OPINION

By FESS, J.

The Common Pleas Court upon review of the record found the order of the Department of Liquor Control to be supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence and to be in accordance with law. Upon this appeal from the judgment of the common pleas court, this court is limited in its review to a determination of the correctness of that judgment, i. e., that the order is supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence and in accordance with law. Finding no error in the proceedings and judgment of the common pleas court, it is our duty to affirm such judgment, and in my opinion it is unnecessary for this court to consider or determine such matters as the extent of the penalty imposed upon the appellant, his alleged right to a rehearing, or other so-called assignment of errors filed in the common pleas court and refiled in this court. Cf. Delmonte Cafe, Inc. v. Department of Liquor Control, 74 Abs 459 , and next to last paragraph of §119.12 R. C.

I therefore concur in the judgment of affirmance.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.