Case Name: KRAWETZKE et v. ACKERMAN
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1932-05-23
Citations: 12 Ohio Law Abs. 128
Docket Number: No 244
Parties: KRAWETZKE et v ACKERMAN
Judges: LLOYD, RICHARDS and WILLIAMS, JJ, concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 12
Pages: 128–128

Head Matter:
KRAWETZKE et v ACKERMAN
Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Sandusky Co
No 244.
Decided May 23, 1932
Mr. M. G. Thraves, Fremont, for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Stahl, Stahl & Stahl, Fremont, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
BY THE COURT
The Constitution gives the right to an owner to defend his property and the evidence in this case shows that is what he was doing. Such defense could not be a violation of an ordinance which, by its terms, prevents firing a gun inside the municipality.
This conclusion renders it unnecessary to determine whether there would be a liability if the ordinance had been violated.
Finding no prejudicial error, the judgment is affirmed.
LLOYD, RICHARDS and WILLIAMS, JJ, concur.