Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

230 F.2d 952

Docket No. 12572.

Hoeppner v. Coon

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Feb. 28, 1956.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1956-02-28

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1963

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Lazier v. United States · Smith v. United States · Smith v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1956-02-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Frankenstein & Frankenstein, Ft. Wayne, Ind., Milton L. Farber, Columbus, Ohio, for appellant.

¶2Wiles & Doueher, Columbus, Ohio, Rendigs, Fry & Kiely, Cincinnati, Ohio, for appellee.

¶3Before MARTIN, McALLISTER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This appeal from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict for the appellees in appellant’s action for personal injuries received while a patron of appellees’ bathing beach, was heard upon the record, briefs, and argument of counsel for the parties;

¶6And it appearing that the trial court committed no error prejudicial to the appellant in the admission of evidence, the instructions to the jury, or otherwise;

¶7It is ordered that the judgment of the district court be and it hereby is affirmed.

/230/f2d/952 · .json · Public domain