State v. Hoffman
| Citation | 144 Ohio St. 186,57 N.E.2d 776 |
| Decision Date | 11 October 1944 |
| Docket Number | 30081. |
| Parties | STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. HOFFMAN, Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Appeal from Court of Appeals, Franklin County.
Isadore L. Margulis, of Columbus, for appellant.
Ralph J. Bartlett, Pros. Atty., and Forrest F. Smith, both of Columbus, for appellee.
It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
28 cases
-
Amerifirst Savings Bank of Xenia v. Krug
... ... called another individual in the midst of filling out her application, and offered this individual "another $1,000 check" if this person would state to Amerifirst that Wolford worked as his secretary. As a result of that conversation, Wolford stated that her Amerifirst application indicated that ... ...
-
Parton v. Weilnau
... ... The only evidence which plaintiff relies upon with respect to that issue is defendant's exhibit 32ZZ, the testimony of a state highway patrolman and the testimony of a police officer who made a laboratory analysis of decedent's blood ... Defendant's exhibit ... ...
- Elfers v. Bright
-
Schlaegel v. Howell
... ... It is sufficient if the intent is disclosed by word, deed, act, or even silence. Id., quoting LaPoint at 25, quoting Rutledge v. Hoffman, 81 Ohio App. 85, 86, 75 N.E.2d 608 (1st Dist.1947). { 18} Here, the evidentiary materials submitted by the defendants do not raise a genuine issue ... ...
Request a trial to view additional results