Beardsley v. J. W. Zacharias & Co.

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Beardsley v. J. W. Zacharias & Co.

10 Ohio Cir. Dec. 259

DecidedNovember 20, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 10 Ohio Cir. Dec. 259 (Beardsley v. J. W. Zacharias & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Cuyahoga Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beardsley v. J. W. Zacharias & Co., 10 Ohio Cir. Dec. 259 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Hale, J.

The section, 93 O. L., 141, provides for an appeal from an order of a justice of the peace dissolving an attachment to the court of common pleas, and for the hearing in the court, or by a judge of that' court, as an original question.

After the order of the court or judge, made upon the motion and transmitted, with the order and papers, to the justice, the jurisdiction of the court of common pleas ends. That court then has no jurisdiction to entertain a motion for a new trial or vacate its former order. Indeed, no motion for a new trial is authorized by this proceeding.

It, there I ore, follows that the order of the court of common pleas made on May 22, 1899, and on June 5, 1899, after the papers had been transmitted back to the justice, were null and void, and such orders are reversed and set aside.

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

Hale, J.

The section, 93 O. L., 141, provides for an appeal from an order of a justice of the peace dissolving an attachment to the court of common pleas, and for the hearing in the court, or by a judge of that' court, as an original question.

After the order of the court or judge, made upon the motion and transmitted, with the order and papers, to the justice, the jurisdiction of the court of common pleas ends. That court then has no jurisdiction to entertain a motion for a new trial or vacate its former order. Indeed, no motion for a new trial is authorized by this proceeding.

It, there I ore, follows that the order of the court of common pleas made on May 22, 1899, and on June 5, 1899, after the papers had been transmitted back to the justice, were null and void, and such orders are reversed and set aside.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Ohio Cir. Dec. 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beardsley-v-j-w-zacharias-co-ohcirctcuyahoga-1899.