Ohio Supreme Court, 1964

Hirschenberger v. Cookston

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 29, 1964 · Gibson, Griffith, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Taet, Zimmerman

1 Ohio St. 2d 66; 203 N.E.2d 314; 30 Ohio Op. 2d 37; 1964 Ohio LEXIS 736

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

City of East Cleveland v. Landingham (Ohio Ct. App. 1994)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The domicile of decedent is a question of fact. The records contain sufficient evidence to support the judgment of the Probate Court. The Court of Appeals was in error in substituting its judgment for that of the Probate Court on a question of fact and entering final judgments. In re Estate of Tyler, 159 Ohio St., 492. However, its judgment doing so may be treated as a reversal on the weight of the evidence. See Henry v. Henry, 157 Ohio St., 319.

The judgments of the Court of Appeals are reversed and the causes are remanded to the Probate Court for further proceedings.

Judgments reversed.

Taet, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur.

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