Collins v. John
This text of 1 Wright 628 (Collins v. John) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Let the remittitur be entered.
The case was then submitted without argument.
[649]*649BY THE COURT. This record does not clearly show what the judgment of the Common Pleas was for. If intended to be for a penalty under the statute (29 O. L. 66), it is bad, because the instrument which is the foundation of the suit is not within the provisions of the statute. If intended as a judgment of twenty-six dollars only, then the judgment for costs is erroneous. The remittitur which has been entered, leaves the judgment one for twenty-six dollars and costs. It must, therefore, be affirmed for twenty-six dollars, and reversed as to the costs. This, under our law, will leave each party to pay one-half the costs in error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Wright 628, 1 Ohio Ch. 628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-john-ohio-1834.