Case ID: ohio-law-abs_79/html/0194-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By THE COURT.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KLINGBEIL et, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BOARD OF LIQUOR CONTROL, Defendant-Appellee.
    Ohio Appeals, Tenth District, Franklin County.
    No. 5662.
    Decided October 7, 1957.
    John T. Feighan, Jr., Willis T. Barber, Cleveland, for plaintiffs-appellants.
    William Saxbe, Atty. Genl., S. Noel Melvin and David L. Zeigler, Asst. Attys. Genl., Columbus, for defendant-appellee.
    (HORNBECK, J, of the Second District, sitting by assignment in the Tenth District.)
   OPINION

By THE COURT.

We have examined the record in this case and considered the assignments of error, briefs and oral arguments of counsel and are of the opinion that none of the assigned errors are well taken.

Judge Leach, in a well-considered opinion, reviewed the legal questions presented and, in our opinion, came to the proper conclusion, that the order of the Board of Liquor Control was supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence and is in accordance with law. The judge of the Common Pleas Court had a right to draw the conclusions he did with reference to the chemical analysis and the presence of ethyl alcohol.

That circumstantial evidence may permit reasonable inferences and conclusions is sound law. See Ross, etc. v. Board of Liquor Control, 72 Abs 415, headnotes 1 and 2; also, Abdoney, etc. v. Board of Liquor Control, 72 Abs 513, headnote 2.

We adopt the opinion of Judge Leach and affirm the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

PETREE, PJ, MILLER, J, concur. ,

HORNBECK, J, dissents.