Home/Ohio Court of Appeals/Bridge v. Ring

Bridge v. Ring

6 Ohio Law. Abs. 11
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bridge v. Ring. Read the opinion of the Court — 25 Ohio App. 149 →
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1927·Published

Opinion

RICHARDS, J.

1. Under 10214 GC., all proceedings relating to attachment must be liberally construed to promote objects of law and assist parties in obtaining justice^

2. Where life tenant was allegedly fraudulently induced to convey property to remain-derman by instrument represented to be lease and remaindermen by instrument thereafter conveyed property to third party, life tenant’s action against remainderman'to recover difference between value of property and amount received is ratification of conveyance, and attachment for such sum is based on “demand arising on contract,” within 11819 GC., liberally construed as required by 10214 GC.

3. As respects attachment,'.deed, on being executed and delivered, becomes contract.

(Williams and Young, JJ., confeur.)

For reference to full opinion, v5jee .Omnibus Index, last page, this issue. ,

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

Bridge v. Ring, 6 Ohio Law. Abs. 11 (Ohio Ct. App. 1927).

6 Ohio Law. Abs. 11 (Bridge v. Ring) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.