Pettibone v. Mckinnon
| Decision Date | 07 December 1932 |
| Docket Number | 23556 |
| Citation | 183 N.E. 783,125 Ohio St. 605 |
| Parties | Pettibone v. Mckinnon. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Supreme Court - Jurisdiction - Conflict cases certified by Court of Appeals - Entire case reviewable, and consideration not limited to single conflict - Supreme Court will affirm or reverse judgment, when judgment entered below - Negligence - Charge to jury contradictory and erroneous - Violation of speed statute - Section 12603, General Code.
1. When the Court of Appeals certifies its record to this court for review, on the ground that the decision which the appellate court has reached on one of the grounds of reversal is in conflict with the decision of another Court of Appeals upon the same question, such action of the Court of Appeals brings the entire case to this court for review and this court is not limited to a consideration of the single error with respect to which the Court of Appeals has certified the case here for review.
2. When the Court of Appeals, in addition to certifying a case as in conflict, renders a judgment affirming or reversing the judgment of the trial court, this court will affirm or reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals as the law of the case may require.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Messrs C.A. & L.B. Weldon and Mr. Barton Walters, for plaintiff in error.
Mr Charles H. May and Messr. Williams, Williams, Klapp & Reynolds, for defendant in error.
This case is in this court by reason of a certificate of conflict embraced in the journal entry of the Court of Appeals of the Fourth Appellate District.
The action in the court of common pleas was brought by Pettibone against McKinnon for the recovery of damages sustained by Pettibone while walking upon a public highway in the open country and in the night season, by reason of the negligence of McKinnon in driving his automobile over Pettibone. The injuries occasioned by the collision were very important. The action resulted in a judgment in favor of Pettibone. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment on three errors of the trial judge in his instructions to the jury. With reference to the first ground of error set forth in the entry of reversal, the Court of Appeals found that the judgment upon which it had agreed was in conflict with a judgment theretofore entered by the Court of Appeals of the First Ap- pellate District, and thereupon certified the case to this court for review.
The defendant in error here contends that, as the Court of Appeals found that its judgment of reversal was in conflict in respect to the first of the three grounds of error in the charge, this finding...
To continue reading
Request your trial