Doe v. Gibson & Jolley

2 Ohio 338
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 15, 1826
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Ohio 338 (Doe v. Gibson & Jolley) 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.

Bluebook
Doe v. Gibson & Jolley, 2 Ohio 338 (Ohio 1826).

Opinion

[315]*315The Court were' divided in opinion upon the point whether the statute of uses, 27 Hen. VIII., chap. 10, had ever been in force in Ohio. Two judges held that that statute was in force in Ohio from 1795 to January, 1806, for all the purposes that it was in force in Yirginia or England. The other two judges held differently.

But the judges were unanimously of opinion that, it being shown that the grantee, Ann Byrd, was within the exception of the statute, it was incumbent on the defendants to show that those whose interest was dependent on hers were not within the exception. Consequently the motion for a new trial was overruled, and judgment given for the plaintiff.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Ohio 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doe-v-gibson-jolley-ohio-1826.