Hamilton Circuit Court, 1908

Kauther v. Vigransky

Kauther v. Vigransky
Hamilton Circuit Court · Decided December 19, 1908 · Giffen, Smith, Swing
12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 48; 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 261

Counsel

Walter Schmitt, for plaintiff in error., Prescott Smith, contra.

Kauther v. Vigransky

Opinion of the Court

Upon examination of the record in -above case -the court is of the opinion that the verdict is fully sustained by the evidence. The evidence does not substantiate the claim of plaintiff in error as set up in the petition, that defendants were his agents and that fraud was practiced upon him. On the contrary, he emphatically denies such relationship and practically admits the claim of defendants in error.

Any errors of law that may exist, if in fact any such do exist, are therefore not prejudicial- to plaintiff in error and the judgment of the trial court is -affirmed.

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