Hughes v. Dale

Hamilton Circuit Court

Hughes v. Dale

9 Ohio Cir. Dec. 270

DecidedJanuary 15, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 9 Ohio Cir. Dec. 270 (Hughes v. Dale) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hughes v. Dale, 9 Ohio Cir. Dec. 270 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Swing, J. ;

Cox, J., concurs; Smith, J., dissents.

A majority of the court are of the opinion that the judgment of the court of common pleas in this case should be affirmed, on the ground that the property levied upon by the bank did not pass to the assignee and become part of the assets of this trust by virtue of the assignment, but passed by virtue of an agreement between the bank and the assignee, and therefore did not become assets in his hands as such assignee, to be distributed according to law.

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

Swing, J. ;

Cox, J., concurs; Smith, J., dissents.

A majority of the court are of the opinion that the judgment of the court of common pleas in this case should be affirmed, on the ground that the property levied upon by the bank did not pass to the assignee and become part of the assets of this trust by virtue of the assignment, but passed by virtue of an agreement between the bank and the assignee, and therefore did not become assets in his hands as such assignee, to be distributed according to law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Ohio Cir. Dec. 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-dale-ohcircthamilton-1898.