Ohio Court of Appeals, 1951

Butler v. Cornute

Butler v. Cornute
Ohio Court of Appeals · Decided September 11, 1951 · Hornbeck, Miller, Wiseman
66 Ohio Law. Abs. 257

Butler v. Cornute

Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By THE COURT.

We have examined the record in this case and carefully considered the law applicable thereto. In our opinion there was evidence of sufficient probative force to support the judgment. Finding no error in the record prejudicial to the rights of the appellant the judgment is affirmed.

HORNBECK, PJ, WISEMAN & MILLER, JJ, concur.

070rehearing

ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

No. 4633.

OPINION

By THE COURT.

Submitted on application for rehearing. Counsel for appellant request the court to specifically pass on the assignment of error, which is:

Did the court err in overruling the motion to dismiss at the conclusion of plaintiff’s case?

This particular assignment of error is not well made because the defendant-appellant after the motion to dismiss *258was overruled proceeded to and did present evidence in defense. Thus the defendant-appellant waived his right to predicate error on the ruling of the court on the motion. The motion to dismiss being renewed at the end of the case raised the question as to whether upon all the evidence introduced there was sufficient evidence to sustain plaintiff’s case. See Vol. 39 O. Jur., pgs 872 and 873 and cases cited in support of the text, particularly Traction Co. v. Durack, 78 Oh St 243, and Halkias v. Wilkoff Co., 141 Oh St 139.

The application will be denied.

HORNBECK, PJ, WISEMAN & MILLER, JJ, concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.