Gilbert v. Gilbert

Ohio Supreme Court

Gilbert v. Gilbert

90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 417

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 1, 1914

DocketNo. 13874

StatusPublished

This text of 90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 417 (Gilbert v. Gilbert) 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

Gilbert v. Gilbert, 90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 417 (Ohio 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed.;: ;S,ee journal eptryp, ,;i

..¡This oourtbfinds that after this .ca-Use -had beén ,,r.e.mandéd ‘«to, the. ¡court of. common pleas. o'f. Cuyahoga county. ¡purspanf ,to the .judgment heretofore •.gendered, by • this • court, in. said; cause [83 ■ Ohio ¡jit.,., 26S]¡, the.:-.plaintiff-in error .filed her reply in said court of common pleas, in which she admitted that she had filed an answer in the •suit 3 for- divorce •-brought by‘¡the def'erid.arifi in . error, in. South .Dakota, ‘and that she had appeared in. court, arid contested-the same, but; by the-reply so ¡filed', in-this capse plaintiff denied the allegations hi,thh answer of-the defendant to.the éffeót that the .plaintiff'.had voluntarily .submitted t© .the said court in South.Dakota-.for its considerátion (in making final decision of the rights of the’parties therein upon the question of alimony) the orders and doings of the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga toUnfv/asHvell as all other claims that the plaintiff had or claimed to have against the defendant.

f"- This court further finds' that by denial-the reply presented an:'ri'ssue of fact' which the plaintiff in • error • is 'entitled' to hake tided in the Court below according'to; law; that if on the trial such isstie shall Be'determined in favor of the plaintiff she will ‘be ■ entitled to recover in this action the amount with interest of the installments under the decree rendered by the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga county [418]*418which were due and unpaid prior to the date of the '\decree for divorce by the court in South Dakotajin the proceeding in which the plaintiff 'herein was a party, and in which proceeding she entered her appearance and filed her answer as aforesaid.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby, reversed, and this cause is remanded to the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga county for further proceedings according to law.

Nichols, C. J., Shauck, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker, Newman and Wilkin, JJ., concur.

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

Judgment reversed.;: ;S,ee journal eptryp, ,;i

..¡This oourtbfinds that after this .ca-Use -had beén ,,r.e.mandéd ‘«to, the. ¡court of. common pleas. o'f. Cuyahoga county. ¡purspanf ,to the .judgment heretofore •.gendered, by • this • court, in. said; cause [83 ■ Ohio ¡jit.,., 26S]¡, the.:-.plaintiff-in error .filed her reply in said court of common pleas, in which she admitted that she had filed an answer in the •suit 3 for- divorce •-brought by‘¡the def'erid.arifi in . error, in. South .Dakota, ‘and that she had appeared in. court, arid contested-the same, but; by the-reply so ¡filed', in-this capse plaintiff denied the allegations hi,thh answer of-the defendant to.the éffeót that the .plaintiff'.had voluntarily .submitted t© .the said court in South.Dakota-.for its considerátion (in making final decision of the rights of the’parties therein upon the question of alimony) the orders and doings of the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga toUnfv/asHvell as all other claims that the plaintiff had or claimed to have against the defendant.

f"- This court further finds' that by denial-the reply presented an:'ri'ssue of fact' which the plaintiff in • error • is 'entitled' to hake tided in the Court below according'to; law; that if on the trial such isstie shall Be'determined in favor of the plaintiff she will ‘be ■ entitled to recover in this action the amount with interest of the installments under the decree rendered by the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga county [418]*418which were due and unpaid prior to the date of the '\decree for divorce by the court in South Dakotajin the proceeding in which the plaintiff 'herein was a party, and in which proceeding she entered her appearance and filed her answer as aforesaid.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby, reversed, and this cause is remanded to the court of common pleas of Cuyahoga county for further proceedings according to law.

Nichols, C. J., Shauck, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker, Newman and Wilkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilbert-v-gilbert-ohio-1914.