Case Name: EDFREDS, INC v. BORMET, Jr., an infant, etc
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1934-01-30
Citations: 16 Ohio Law Abs. 417
Docket Number: No 2321
Parties: EDFREDS, INC v BORMET, Jr., an infant, etc
Judges: WASHBURN, PJ, and FUNK, J, concur in judgment.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 16
Pages: 417–417

Head Matter:
EDFREDS, INC v BORMET, Jr., an infant, etc
Ohio Appeals, 9th Dist, Summit Co
No 2321.
Decided Jan 30, 1934
Lahrpier & Hadley, Akron, for plaintiff in error.
William Morris, Akron, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
OPINION
By STEVENS, J.
The rule is stated in 14 R.C.L., "Infants," §34, as follows:
"It is for the judge to define the class and character of articles which may be held necessaries; and, if there is evidence creating a reasonable question, it is for the jury to say whether the particular articles sued for fall within the class."
We are of the opinion that whether or not the drums in question were "necessaries," within the purview of the statute, was a question for the jury under proper instructions, and our reading of the record does not persuade us that the finding of the jury to the effect that said drums were not "necessaries," was manifestly' against the weight of the evidence.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
WASHBURN, PJ, and FUNK, J, concur in judgment.