Harbine v. Davis
This text of 4 Ohio Law. Abs. 484 (Harbine v. Davis) 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
John T. Harbine, Jr., brought this action originally in the Montgomery Common Pleas agaist Robert Davis, upon a certain promissory note executed by Davis, the note being secured by a mortgage. The note was made payable to one Rawls who was also the mortgagee.
The defense was failure of consideration and a mortgage of such failure on the part of Harbine, said notes having been given in payment of a truck which was never delivered.
The Common Pleas overruled a motion and demurrer to the answer as it found that a good defense was stated, which ruling was affirmed by the Appeals.
Harbing in the Supreme Court contends:
1. That the demurrer should have been sustained because facts were not stated to constitute a good defense to the allegations in the petition.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Ohio Law. Abs. 484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harbine-v-davis-ohio-1926.