American Ins. Union v. Read

157 N.E. 315, 24 Ohio App. 192, 5 Ohio Law. Abs. 297, 1927 Ohio App. LEXIS 548
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 14, 1927
Docket1242
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 157 N.E. 315 (American Ins. Union v. Read) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
American Ins. Union v. Read, 157 N.E. 315, 24 Ohio App. 192, 5 Ohio Law. Abs. 297, 1927 Ohio App. LEXIS 548 (Ohio Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

PARDEE, J.

The Akron Chapter No. 300 of the American Insurance Union obtained a judgment against Loyd R. Read in the Summit Common Pleas, and an execution on said judgment was returned unsatisfied. On the return of the execution, the Union filed a motion asking for an order requiring defendant to appear and answer concerning his property. The order was made and the court found that defendant was not the owner of any property subject to execution.

The plaintiff perfected an appeal and defendant filed a motion in the Court of Appeals asking to have the appeal dismissed for the reason that the proceeding instituted in the Common Pleas Court is not appealable. The Court of Appeals held:

1. Only those proceedings which were known in chancery before the adoption of the civil code are appealable. Sec. 6, Art. IV. Ohio Const.

2. The defendant claims that the proceeding instituted was one in aid of execution provided by statute, and is in no way similar to the original chancery proceeding known as a bill of discovery, as contended by plaintiff.

3. While the proceeding in aid of execution provided by 11768 GC. et. seq. accomplished to a large extent that which had theretofore been accomplished by a bill of discovery, it was not the same thing as a bill of discovery'; it was a summary proceeding after judgment and was intended to be a special statutory one, unknown to the law prior thereto, and it was not intended to take the place of a civil action under the code in the nature of a bill of discovery.

4. The proceeding started in the lower court was one in aid of execution and not a chancery bill of discovery under the code oi civil procedure, and is not appealable.

Motion to dismiss appeal sustained.

(Washburn, PJ., and Punk, J., concur.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Huntington National Bank v. Lewis, Unpublished Decision (5-9-2006)
2006 Ohio 2267 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2006)
James S. Jackson Co., Inc. v. Meyer
677 P.2d 835 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1984)
Dyckowski v. Bohoric
23 Ohio Law. Abs. 400 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1936)
Currie v. Baltimore Ohio Rd. Co.
8 N.E.2d 453 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1936)
Conway v. Gooden Bros.
15 Ohio Law. Abs. 397 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1933)
Stern v. Cols. Mutl. Life Ins. Co.
177 N.E. 923 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1931)
First National Bank v. Buchanan
8 Ohio Law. Abs. 407 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
157 N.E. 315, 24 Ohio App. 192, 5 Ohio Law. Abs. 297, 1927 Ohio App. LEXIS 548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-ins-union-v-read-ohioctapp-1927.