Case law

Pratt v. Ætna Life Insurance

5 Ohio C.C. 587 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1891

In the case of Hillier v. … Maginnis v. Schwab, 24 Ohio St. 336 .

Anonymous—In re Notice of Intention to Appeal

20 Ohio C.C. 702 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Nov 15, 1897

In Moore v. Brown, 10 Ohio, 197, it was held that the omission to enter notice at the term at which the judgment was entered could not be cured by a nunc pro tunc order of a subsequent term. … The statute, section 5227, Revised Statutes, now requires the notice to be entered within three days,and so far as this question is concerned, that is the only difference, so that Moore v. Brown, supra, controls.

Page v. McConville

10 Ohio C.C. 316 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1895

Hinkle, attorney for Doane and Brown. We think this case differs essentially from that relied upon by the counsel for plaintiff in error, Wangerien et al. v. Aspell et al., 47 Ohio St. 250 . … We consider it to be the law of this state as settled in the cases of Smithers v. Rainey, 14 Ohio St. 287 ; Jones v. March, 80 Ohio St. 20 , and Burke v.

Imperial Insurance v. Wolf

11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 815 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Nov 15, 1900

Counsel relies on the case in Ellis v. Insurance Co., 32 Fed. Rep., 646, 649, decided by Justice Brewer, recognized as one of the ablest members our of Supreme Court of the United States. … It is the case of Merril v. Colonial Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 169 Mass., 10 , 47 N.

Bank of Circleville v. Bowsher

15 Ohio C.C. 114 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1897

Brown has. not been overruled, and is decisive of the question here presented. The statute under consideration in Moore v. … Credit Co. v. Ark. Cent. Ry., 128, U. S. 258. Motion sustained, appeal dismissed, Note. See Layer, guardian v. Shaber Admr., 38 W. L.

Bellaire Goblet Co. v. City of Findlay

5 Ohio C.C. 418 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Mar 15, 1891

Gorby the board, for the purpose of acting upon this contract, was reduced to four, which was not a legal board, and hence had no power to act. It is said by Thurman, Judge, in the case of Bloom v. … Also in the case of Doll v.

Britt v. Lewis

16 Ohio C.C. 343 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jul 15, 1898

In the case of Hamilton v. … From the case of Perry v.

Deming v. City of Cleveland

22 Ohio C.C. 1 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Dec 15, 1900

Y. 268; Barclay v. Commonwealth, 25 Penn. St., 503; Ely v. Board of Supervisors, 36 N. Y. 297 .) … J., in Fisher v. McGirr, 1 Gray 1 , and in Brown v. Perkins, 12 Gray, 89 .)” Mr.

Dalzell, Gilmore & Leighton Co. v. City of Findlay

5 Ohio C.C. 435 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Mar 15, 1891

While it may be said that Hull or Gorby, or both of them, were but a minority in the Board of Gas Trustees, and a majority outside of them could act, still the city has a right to a full board qualified to act, and the court … In the case of Doll v.

Ratterman v. Niehaus & Klinkham

4 Ohio C.C. 502 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1890

“A statement of facts^on which such addition is made shall be entered on the journal of the board.” This is mandatory. Fratz v. Mueller, 35 Ohio St. 398 . … It is claimed in this case that the statement of fact on the journal is the same as that sustained by the Supreme Court in Fratz v. Mueller, 35 Ohio St. 398 .

Gaylord v. Hubbard

12 Ohio C.C. 112 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1896

belong to the same political party This board is denominated a Board of Equalization and Assessment, There is no complaint in the petition in regard to the appointment of the board; or that they were not suitable; nor is … 'The law is well settled in this state, as appears from Wagner v. Loomis, 37 Ohio St. 571 ; and State ex. rel. v.

State ex rel. Carew v. Lewis

20 Ohio C.C. 319 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1900

Section 2807, Revised Statutes; Lewis, Auditor, v. State ex rel. Mullikan, 59 Ohio St., 37 . … Co. v. Cappeller, 38 Ohio St., 560 ; State, ex rel. Poe, v. Raine, 47 Ohio St., 447 . It is further claimed that the testimony of Mr.

State ex rel. Carew v. Lewis

11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 13 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jul 1, 1900

Stat., Lewis, Auditor, v. State, ex rel. Mullikan, 59 Ohio St., 37 . … Insurance Co. v. Cappeller, 38 Ohio St., 560 ; State ex rel. Poe, v. Raine, 47 Ohio St., 447 . Miller Outcalt, for the relator. Wilson, Cosgrave & Jones, for the auditor. It is further claimed that the testimony of Mr.

Squier v. City of Cincinnati

5 Ohio C.C. 400 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1891

Under the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cincinnati v. … Such is a strong intimation, if not in the direct holding in the Season-good case before' cited, and to the same effect is the decision in the case of Raymond v. Cleveland, 42 Ohio St. 522 , in similar language.

Yaple v. Morgan

2 Ohio C.C. 406 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1887

That the state has general control of police matters is well settled in the case of the Western College v. The City of Cleveland, 12 Ohio St., 375 -377. … It is, as held in the case of the fire department, Wheeler v.

Mooney v. Richardson

21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 56 · Ohio Circuit Courts · May 16, 1908

Davies v. Land Invest. Co. 76 Ohio St. 407 [81 N. E. Rep. 755]. … Cincinnati v. James, 55 Ohio St. 180 [44 N. E. Rep. 925]. Decree accordingly. Swing and Smith, JJ., concur.

City of Cincinnati ex rel. Weisman v. Johnson

18 Ohio C.C. 611 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1899

Section 2828, Revised Statutes, by various amendments, gave successively to the Board of Public Work*, the Board of Administration, and by the section as it now stands, to the Board of City Affairs of this city, in substantially … city has the same jurisdiction and power and must perform the same duties, must in the passage of the resolution act in the same way, and as it was not done, that the decision of the Supreme Court in the oase of Campbell v.

State ex rel. Monnett v. McMillan

15 Ohio C.C. 163 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Dec 15, 1897

The seventh division concerns boards of improvements, boards of administration and the like, and in no way affects the question before us. … State ex rel. v. Kearns, 47 O. S., 560.

Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway Co. v. Valentine Fries

14 Ohio C.C. 55 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1897

a paper; and it appears from the testimony that he did obtain some paper from Brown, and the defendant company produced the paper and offered to show that John Brown authorized Caleb Brown to execute the paper, or sign the … Railroad Company v. Robbins, 35 Ohio St., 483 ; Warner v. Tanner, 38 Ohio St., 120 ; Railroad v. O’Harra, 48 Ohio St., 343 ; Railroad v.

State ex rel. Kramer v. Lewis

1 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 56 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Feb 15, 1903

Under the decision in case of Schindler v. Louis, 16 C. … This section of the statute was before the Supreme Court of Ohio in the case of State, ex rel Poe, v. Raine, Aud., 47 O. S., 447.