19 Ohio St. 587

Asbury W. King et al. v. Edwin P. Safford.

Motion for leave to file a petition in error to reverse a judgment of the district court of Athens county.

By the court

Held :

1. Under the act of Eeb. 19th, 1864 (S. & S. 5?5), the holder of a note seemed by mortgage may, in a single action, demand and have a judgment against all the makers of the note, and a sale of the mortgaged premises, although the mortgage is executed only by a part of the makers of the note.

2. A district court held by three or more of the common pleas judges, without the presence of a judge of this court, is a lawful and constitutional district court.

Motion overruled.

*588 R. A. Constable and R. E. Constable, for the motion,

cited in argument:

1. On the first point: S. & C. 968; Code, sec. 81; S. & S 575.

2. On the second point: Const. of Ohio, art. 4, secs. 3, 5, 15; Convention Debates, vol. i. pp. 590, 591, 592, 594, 597 624; vol. ii. p. 696; 67 O. L. 29.

Browns & Wildes, contra.

Thomas F. Wildes

cited, in argument:

1. On the first point: S. & S. 575; Code, secs. 80, 81, 35, 40, 90; Ladd v. James, 10 Ohio St. 437; McCarthy v. Garraghty, 10 Ohio St. 438; Story's Eq. Pl. secs. 530, 539 a; Van Santford's Pl. 118-121; New York & New Haven R. R. Co. v. Schuyler, Cross et al., 17 N. Y. 603.

2. On the second point: Hollister & Smith v. The Judges, &c., 8 Ohio St. 201.

King v. Safford
19 Ohio St. 587

Case Details

Name
King v. Safford
Decision Date
Dec 1, 1869
Citations

19 Ohio St. 587

Jurisdiction
Ohio

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!