Case ID: ohio-law-abs_6/html/0311-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAMILTON, PJ.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CAMPBELL v. EDDY.
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist., Hamilton Co.
    Dawson E. Bradley and Jos. W. 0’Harra, Cincinnati, fob Campbell.
    DeCamp, Sutphin & Brumleve, Cincinnati, for Eddy.
    225. CHARGE OF COURT — 1235 Verdicts — 753 Measure of Damages.
    1. Assent by defendant’s counsel that minimum verdict would be certain sum, warrants court’s statement that verdict will necessarily be for plaintiff.
    ■ 2. Omission in charge held not prejudicial where same was not called to attention of court and testimony fully covered points involved.
   HAMILTON, PJ.

1. Where defendant’s counsel assented to statement by plaintiff’s counsel that minimum verdict would be a certain sum, court’s statement'to jury that their verdict will necessarily be for plaintiff was not error.

2. In action for breach of employment contract, 'omission, in court’s charge as to measure of damages, of question of minimization of damages by efforts of plaintiff to secure other employment, held not reversible error, where omission was not called to court’s attention, and plaintiff fully testified as to her reasonable effort to secure employment and the failure.

(Cushing, J., concurs.)

For reference to full opinion, see Omnibux Index, last page, this issue.