Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.84s
14 Ohio St. 483 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1846
So far as is known, the'rule, as established in Walton v. Shelley, 1 Term, 296, has been uniformly followed in this state. … Notwithstanding tho old rule of Lord Mansfield has been disregarded in some of the state courts, and shaken by more recent English decisions, it has been steadily ad *489 hered to by the Supreme Court of the United States (Henderson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished5 Ohio Law. Abs. 553 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1927
Brown was fined by the Municipal Court of Cincinnati, on three different charges and on the same day by the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County on a fourth charge; none of the fines were specifically declared to be cumulative … Brown was accordingly released. This action is filed in the Supreme Court as a matter of right because it originated in the Court of Appeals. The sheriff seeks to1 reverse the holding.
Cited 0 timesPublished31 Ohio Law Rep. 50 · Ohio Supreme Court · May 12, 1965
Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.
Cited 0 timesPublished47 Ohio St. (N.S.) 102 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1890
Noble v. The State, 22 Ohio St. 541 . … Blackmore v. Brider, 2 Phillimore 359; Woods v. Woods, 2 Curt. Ecc. 516.
Cited 0 timesPublished17 Ohio St. (N.S.) 33 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1866
*A similar question arose in Lessee of Winder v. Starling, 7 Ohio, 539, as to the verification of delinquent lists, in 1826 and 1827. … The decision in that case was approved and followed in Ward v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna