Case Name: ORRVILLE (Village) v. COYLE
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1929-10-17
Citations: 7 Ohio Law Abs. 713
Docket Number: No. 856
Parties: ORRVILLE (Village) v COYLE
Judges: 
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 7
Pages: 713–714

Head Matter:
ORRVILLE (Village) v COYLE
Ohio Appeals, 9th Dist, Wayne Co
No. 856.
Decided October 17, 1929
Messrs. A. H. Etling, and Weiser & Weimer, all of Wooster, for Orrville (Village) .
Messrs. Troutman & Taggart and Weygandt & Ross and Carl Hoover, all of Wooster, for Coyle.

Opinion:
Syllabus by PARDEE, J.
The length of time that an obstruction is across a_ sidewalk in a village, is only one of the' elements which determine whether a village has constructive notice of its presence, and a court is not warranted in taking a case from the jury solely upon a consideration of that element. All of the facts disclosed by the evidence which have a bearing, upon the question of notice must be considered, and generally the issue is one of fact for the jury rather than one of law for the court.
Full opinion will be published later.