Case law

Moore v. State

24 Ohio C.C. Dec. 487 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Sep 26, 1910

You should make reasonable payment for board and clothing for your children. … So in State v. Stouffer, 65 Ohio St. 47 [60 N. E.

Thurston v. Bissel

13 Ohio C.C. 293 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1897

And that case is discussed in Johnson v. Johnson, 51 Ohio St. … The court held in this case, as in the case of Johnson v.

Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. Village of St. Mary's

14 Ohio C.C. 202 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Apr 15, 1897

A definite time is fixed by the board or tribunal ordering the improvement, within which the land or lot owner may perform the required work himself. … Co. v. The Village of DeGraff. Layton & Stueve, for Plaintiff in error. John T. Schoonover, for Defendant in error.

Kelly v. Flanagan

11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 111 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Mar 3, 1900

On July 24, 1899, Ann Flanagan filed a bill of particulars before a j’usticeof the peace for Washington township, in this county, against Patrick *112 Kelly, in which she claimed $89.50, on an account for board, and also … The only case that is directly in point, to which we are cited, is that of Orr v. Schackel, 7 Dec. 352, in the Hamilton county common pleas.

In re the Claim of Lease

4 Ohio C.C. 3 · Ohio Circuit Courts · May 15, 1889

In the case of Aderson v. … Allen v. Russell, 39 Ohio St. 337 ; Gardener v. Woodyear, 1 Ohio, 170; Swasey v. Blackman, 8 Ohio, 5, 20; Ash v. Ash, 9 Ohio St. 383 , 387; Tyler v. Winslow, 15 Ohio St. 364 , 368; Williams v.

Hatch v. St. Clair

2 Ohio C.C. 163 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1887

If, therefore, county commissioners find upon the statute book, a section which prohibits them as a board from allowing a bill for certain expenses of one of their number, unless it is properly certified as provided in the … The only case in Ohio, that we know of under 'this law or that contained in S. & C., is that of The State v.

Toledo Consolidated Street Railway Co. v. Toledo Electric Street Railway Co.

6 Ohio C.C. 362 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1892

Co. v. R. R. … Co. v. Brown, 26 Ohio St. 223 , 224, 238-9. See, also, the reasoning of the supreme court in Railway Company v. Telegraph Association, 48 Ohio St. 390, 432-3. 17.

Smith v. Newark, Somerset & Straitsville R. R.

8 Ohio C.C. 583 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1894

In Mason v. … (See Brown v. Hitchcock, 36 Ohio St. 667 .) We conclude, therefore, that there are no equities to be *591 adjusted between the present holders of said stock and Shields, Evans & Co.

Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Village of St. Bernard

15 Ohio C.C. 588 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1898

Section 2494, which authorized the village to require the company to light its track, was before the Supreme Court of this state in the case of Railroad Company v. … Company v.

Queen Insurance v. Leonard

9 Ohio C.C. 46 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1894

Smith v. Railway Co., 23 Ohio St. 10 ; Schryer v. Hawkes et al., 22 Ohio St. 317 ; Jones v. State, 20 Ohio, 34; Doll v. State, 45 Ohio St. 452 ; Taft v. … In Insurance Co. v.

Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. Teed

14 Ohio C.C. 355 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Mar 15, 1895

In Smith v. The Pittsburgh, Ft. … The case of Smith v. The Railway Company, was an action brought for expelling Smith from a train of the company.

Karsner v. Union Central Life Insurance

12 Ohio C.C. 394 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1895

In the case of Wilbur v. … In case of Brown v.

Bacon, Floto & Co. v. Northwestern Stove Co.

5 Ohio C.C. 289 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1891

In support of this we cite the case of Chauncey Coston v. Paige, 9 Ohio St. page 387. *291 Upon the second ground, to-wit: “ That the corporation has disposed of its property with the intent to defraud its creditors.” … The order of the judge in appointing this receiver conferred upon him the same authority to manage the corporation as was conferred by the stockholders upon their board of directors.

Tucker v. Watts

1 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 589 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jun 26, 1903

The case of Baumgardner v. Browning, 12 Circuit Court Reports, 73, relied upon here by the plaintiff, we think, so far from being authority to sustain his contention 'here, is rather against the plaintiff’s position.

Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. State ex rel. Lawrence

8 Ohio C.C. 220 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1894

Co. v. Wentz, 37 Ohio St. 333 ; Shields v. State, 20 Ohio St. 86 , and 95 U. S. 319 . … It is a part of the syllabus of Robbins v. Shelby County, 120 U. S.

Mustill v. Thornton

22 Ohio C.C. 608 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Sep 15, 1897

S.: Strong v. Strauss 40 Ohio St., 87 ; Board of Education v. Sinton, 41 Ohio St., 504 , 513; Jelke v. Goldsmith, 52 Ohio St., 499 , 516 [40 N. E. … Hurley v. State, 46 Ohio St., 320 [21 N. E. Rep., 645].

Miller v. Toledo Grain & Milling Co.

11 Ohio Cir. Dec. 629 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Oct 15, 1900

High on Injunctions, Sec. 1444; Mead v. Norris, 21 Wis., 310 ; Wellesley v. … There is a cause, which I will not attempt to read from, Second Nat’l Bank v.

Poock v. Ely

4 Ohio C.C. 41 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jun 15, 1889

In support of this view the case of Lima v. … In Chicago v.

Clark v. Boltz

10 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 1 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Apr 29, 1906

In the petition it is set forth with considerable particularity that the plaintiffs, being husband and -wife, entered into a contract — with one Catherine Grant to the effect that the plaintiffs should board and lodge her … The ease of The Toledo, Fremont & Norwalk Company v. Gilbert, 2 C. C. — N. S., 432, presented this same question.

Evans v. Beaver

3 Ohio C.C. 47 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jan 15, 1888

See also Wearse v. Pierce, 24 Pick. 141 ; Connell v. Clifford, 45 Ind. 392 ; Smith v, Newton, 38 Ill. 230 . The second proposition of the syllabus in Rocksborough v. Messick et al., 6 O. … See also Dodge v. Kinzy, 101 Ind. 102 ; Allen v. Davis, 99 Ind. 216 ; Brown v. Will, 108 Ind. 71 . The contract entered into by Mrs. Webb, under these decisions, was clearly illegal and void in its inception.