Opinion

State ex rel. Wilson v. Preston

  • 173 Ohio St. (N.S.) 203
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 14, 1962
Status
Published
Author
Zimmerman
On the bench
Bell, Fourth, Herbert, Matthias, Neill, Place, Radcliff, Stead, Taft, Weygandt, Zimmerman
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Zimmerman, J.,

dissenting. Even if mandamus may properly be considered a “civil action” within the contemplation of the Summary-Judgment Act, the judgment entry of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, ostensibly establishing a 99-year leasehold estate in the relator herein, carries the qualification that he holds such estate “in accordance with the terms of said lease. ’ ’ In my opinion the allegations of the answer in the instant case are of such a character as to preclude the drastic procedure of now entering a summary judgment against the respondent pursuant to the relator’s motion therefor.

Weygandt, C. J., and O’Neill, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.