Bonte v. Cunningham-Holmes Co.

Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County

Bonte v. Cunningham-Holmes Co.

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 791

CourtCourt of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County

DecidedJuly 1, 1923

DocketNo. 186226

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 791 (Bonte v. Cunningham-Holmes Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bonte v. Cunningham-Holmes Co., 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 791 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

MATTHEWS, J.

By the express provisions of Sections 11968 and 11969 GC., a dissolved corporation, no matter how the dissolution has been affected, may be sued in its corporate name as though no dissolution had taken place. By the express terms of the latter section the service may be upon either “an assignee, trustee, receiver thereof, or persons having charge of its assets.

Section 8742 GC. provides that unless otherwise in the dissolution proceedings, the directors shall be the trustees to wind up the affairs of the corporation, but that a trustee may he appointed by the stockholders for that purpose.

In view of the affidavit that a trustee was appointed, the court holds that under Section 11969 service should be made upon that trustee. The motion to quash is therefore sustained.

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

MATTHEWS, J.

By the express provisions of Sections 11968 and 11969 GC., a dissolved corporation, no matter how the dissolution has been affected, may be sued in its corporate name as though no dissolution had taken place. By the express terms of the latter section the service may be upon either “an assignee, trustee, receiver thereof, or persons having charge of its assets.

Section 8742 GC. provides that unless otherwise in the dissolution proceedings, the directors shall be the trustees to wind up the affairs of the corporation, but that a trustee may he appointed by the stockholders for that purpose.

In view of the affidavit that a trustee was appointed, the court holds that under Section 11969 service should be made upon that trustee. The motion to quash is therefore sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ohio Law. Abs. 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonte-v-cunningham-holmes-co-ohctcomplhamilt-1923.