Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.72s
4 Ohio Law. Abs. 603 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1926
This action was brought originally in the Crawford Common Pleas by Frank Derr against Jacob Brown and E. M. Loyer partners, doing business as Brown and Loyer. … Under instructions from Brown Mr. Derr certified on the bill of lading that the hay was sold to Brown and Loyer. The judgment of the Common Pleas'in favor of Brown was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Cited 0 timesPublished1 Ohio Law. Abs. 276 · Ohio Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1923
(Nixon & Chatfield v. Nash & Atkison, 12 Ohio St., 647 , distinguished.) Judgment of .the Court of Appeals, reversed and judgment for plaintiff in. error. Marshall, C. J., Wanamaker, Jones, Matthias and Day, JJ., concur.
Cited 0 timesPublished1 Ohio Law. Abs. 436 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1923
The provisions of Section 1214, General Code giving the owner the right to file such objections and authorizing the board of county commissioner!
Cited 0 timesPublished41 Ohio St. (N.S.) 445 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1884
The fact that that thing was, with Brown’s consent, bid in by Griffith, and that Brown thereafter released to Griffith all Brown’s rights in it, could not give it any value. … Brown’s accommodation. See Erwin v. Shaffer, 9 Ohio St., 48 . Griffith was bound to take notice of this presumption.
Cited 0 timesPublished25 Ohio St. (N.S.) 260 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1874
Mears v. Mears, 15 Ohio St. 90 . … In the ease of Yager v.
Cited 0 timesPublished14 Ohio St. 483 · Ohio Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1846
So far as is known, the'rule, as established in Walton v. Shelley, 1 Term, 296, has been uniformly followed in this state. … Notwithstanding tho old rule of Lord Mansfield has been disregarded in some of the state courts, and shaken by more recent English decisions, it has been steadily ad *489 hered to by the Supreme Court of the United States (Henderson v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna