Bliler v. Deckard

191 N.E.2d 230, 91 Ohio Law. Abs. 33
CourtStark County Court of Common Pleas
DecidedFebruary 11, 1963
DocketNo. 105235
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 191 N.E.2d 230 (Bliler v. Deckard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Stark County Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bliler v. Deckard, 191 N.E.2d 230, 91 Ohio Law. Abs. 33 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1963).

Opinion

Weber, J.

Plaintiffs’ action is for money due under a written lease. Defendants filed a motion to order plaintiffs to attach a copy of the lease to the petition.

Section 2309.31, Revised Code, says:

“When the action or counterclaim is founded on an account or on a written instrument as evidence of indebtedness, [34]*34a copy thereof must he attached to and filed with the pleading. — . ’ ’

Section 2309.32, Revised Code, says:

“In an action or counterclaim founded upon an account, or upon an instrument for the unconditional payment of money only, it is sufficient — -to set forth a copy of the account or instrument, — and to state that there is due to him — .”

Section 2309.04, Revised Code, says the petition must contain: “(A) A statement of facts constituting a cause of action in ordinary and concise language.”

Hence Sections 2309.31 and 2309.32, Revised Code, are exceptions to Section 2309.04, Revised Code, but all three are in pari materia. Section 2317.35, Revised Code, is also important in determining the meaning of Section 2309.31, Revised Code, as hereinafter pointed out.

Gardner’s Bates Ohio Civil Practice, Vol. 1, Sec. 9.55, says — “The custom of some pleaders in erroneously attaching all manner of contracts and written documents to pleadings frequently escape objection. They tend to encumber the record.” And as said in 43 Ohio Jurisprudence (2d), 122:

“Some courts have deemed Section 2309.31, Revised Code (Section 11333, General Code), to include all instruments on which an action for pecuniary relief is founded, or which contain a promise, conditional or unconditional, to pay a fixed sum, such as an insurance policy — .”

“Other courts have taken the view that the statute refers only to instruments for the unconditional payment of money — .”

It is to be noted in the citations thereto that most of the later decisions apply the latter of the above two views.

And at page 121, says:

“The distinction between setting forth copies of certain instruments as required in Section 2309.32, Revised Code (Section 11334, General Code), and attaching copies to a pleading in conformity with Section 2309.31, Revised Code (Section 11333, General Code), is obvious and important. In the former case they become incorporated in the petition by an express reference; in the latter they are attached and filed, not as a part of any statements in the petition, but as evidence.”

The confusion of the courts apparently is caused by trying to distinguish between the phrases “on a written instrument [35]*35as evidence of indebtedness” in Section 2309.31, Revised Code, and “upon an instrument for tbe unconditional payment of money only,” in Section 2309.31, Revised Code.

To absolve this distinction, if there is one, we must look to the history of these sections along with other statutes. The decision in Ables v. Insurance Co., 27 O. N. P. (N. S.), 264, is very well reasoned, was written by Judge Kinkead (early author on pleadings), and reads in part as follows:

“These Sections (11333 and 11334, General Code, now Sections 2309.31 and 2309.32, Revised Code), were originally Sections 117 and 122 respectively and were enacted in 1852 at the first session of the General Assembly after the adoption of the constitution of 1851. Ohio Laws, Vol. 51, pages 75 and 76.

“In their original form these sections read as follows: -Section 117:

“ ‘If the action, counter claim, or set off be founded on an account, or on a note, bill, or other written instrument, as evidence of indebtedness, a copy thereof must be attached to and filed with the pleading.’

“Section 122:

“ ‘In an action, counter claim, or set off founded upon an account, promissory note, bill of exchange or other instrument for the unconditional payment of money only, it shall be sufficient for a party to give a copy of the account or instrument, with all claims and indorsements thereon, and to state that there is due him on such account or instrument from the adverse party a specified sum which he claims with interest.’

“It is to be observed that Section 11333, General Code, contains the words — ‘action, counter claim, or set off founded on an account or on a written instrument as evidence of indebtedness, etc.,’ and Section 11334, General Code, contains the words ‘action, counter claim, or set off founded on an account, count, or an instrument for the unconditional payment of money only, etc. ’; while the original Section 117 reads — -‘ action, counterclaim, or set-off founded on an account, or on a note, bill or other written instrument, as evidence of indebtedness, etc.,’ and Section 122 reads“ action, counter claim or set off founded upon an account, promissory note, bill of exchange or other instrument for the unconditional payment of money only, etc.’ ”

“We have italicized the words contained in the original sec[36]*36tions which are not in the present sections. The Codifiers have omitted these words from Sections 11333 and 11334, General Code, and in so doing have somewhat obscured their meaning. Reference to the original sections, therefore, will aid in the interpretation of these sections in their present form and will assist us in determining the mind and purpose of the legislators in the original enactment of these sections. A careful examination of these original sections and comparison with the present sections leads strongly to the inference that ‘ ‘ accounts, bills and notes,” were intended to fix the class of instruments included under these sections (“ejusdem generis,” 11 Ohio Jurisprudence (2d), 387) although this may not be conclusive.

“In connection with the foregoing sections, it is necessary to consider Section 11554, General Code (Section 2317.35, Revised Code), which was originally Section 361 and enacted at the same time as Sections 117 and 122.

“Section 361 in its original form reads:

“Either party or his attorney, if required, shall deliver to the other party or his attorney a copy of any deed, instrument or other writing whereon the action or defense is founded, or which he intends to offer in evidence at the trial. * * * This section shall not apply to any paper a copy of which is filed with a pleading as provided in Section 117.”

“It will be seen that this section in its original form was substantially the same as it is now in Section 11554, General Code, except that it formerly contained the word deed, and expressly excepted papers embraced under Section 117.

“This is interesting for two reasons, first because the old common law doctrine of Oyer originally applied solely to deeds, and it would seem, therefore, that this section was intended as a substitute for Oyer under the Code, and not Section 11333, General Code, as some authors on pleading seem to hold. Second, by excepting papers embraced under Section 117, it conclusively shows that there are instruments on which an action or defense is founded which do not come under Section 117 or Section 11333, General Code. This narrows our question.

“It is not enough then that the action be founded on a written instrument to bring it within the provision of Section 11333, General Code; it must also be an instrument that is evidence of indebtedness or for the unconditional payment■ of money only.

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

Related

Powers v. Carson
1977 OK 146 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
191 N.E.2d 230, 91 Ohio Law. Abs. 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bliler-v-deckard-ohctcomplstark-1963.