Goodenow v. Tappan

Ohio Supreme Court

Goodenow v. Tappan

1 Ohio 61

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 15, 1823

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Ohio 61 (Goodenow v. Tappan) 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

Goodenow v. Tappan, 1 Ohio 61 (Ohio 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

The court were unanimously of opinion that the seventh count was bad. Judges Pease and Hitchcock were of opinion that all the other six counts were good. Judges Burnet and Sherman were of a different opinion as to some of the counts. The court, therefore, being equally divided on the motion in arrest, it failed; [83, 84]*83, 84and the cause was certified back to Jefferson county, that examination might be had as to the abandonment of the seventh count. If the fact of abandonment is made out, judgment to be entered for the plaintiff on the verdict—otherwise, judgment arrested. †

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

The court were unanimously of opinion that the seventh count was bad. Judges Pease and Hitchcock were of opinion that all the other six counts were good. Judges Burnet and Sherman were of a different opinion as to some of the counts. The court, therefore, being equally divided on the motion in arrest, it failed; [83, 84]*83, 84and the cause was certified back to Jefferson county, that examination might be had as to the abandonment of the seventh count. If the fact of abandonment is made out, judgment to be entered for the plaintiff on the verdict—otherwise, judgment arrested. †

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ohio 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodenow-v-tappan-ohio-1823.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack