Case ID: ohio-law-abs_71/html/0231-01.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

PUCKETT, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ARMBRUST, Defendant-Appellant.
    Ohio Appeals, Second District, Greene County.
    No. 551.
    Decided February 11, 1955.
    Pickrel, Schaeffer & Ebeling, William H. Selva, Dayton, for plaintiffappellee.
    Smith, McCallister & Gibney, Xenia, and Harshman, Young, Colvin & Alexander, Dayton, for defendant-appellant.
   OPINION

By THE COURT:

Submitted on motion of appellee to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the order granting a new trial is not a final order.

There is but one assignment of error, namely, that the trial judge in granting the motion for a new trial abused his discretion.

This raises the one determinative question as to the finality of the order.

“The ruling of the trial court granting a motion for a new trial is a final order from which error may be prosecuted to the Court of Appeals where the granting of such motion constituted an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.”

Webster v. Pullman Co., 51 Oh Ap 131.

See, also, Hoffman v. Knollman, 135 Oh St 170.

The motion will be overruled.

MILLER, PJ, HORNBECK and WISEMAN, JJ, concur.