In re Seitz

Ohio Circuit Courts

In re Seitz

21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 32

DecidedMay 16, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 32 (In re Seitz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Circuit Courts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Seitz, 21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 32 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, J.

The judgment recovered against Minnie Flesher by William F. Wagner and the lien acquired upon her real estate inherited from her mother, Ottilia Seitz, under Secs. 5377 and 5378 Rev. Stat., were not improperly set up in the probate court in the suit to sell the real estate of Ottilia Seitz to pay .debts.

Section 6145 Rev. Stat. provides for the determination of the equities between parties as well as the priorities of liens, and the order of the probate court merely found that the judgment of Wagner was a lien upon the interest of Minnie Flesher in the premises to be sold, and the administrator was ordered to pay the same from the balance due Minnie Flesher.

This was not such a proceeding on a cross petition asking affirmative relief as would require the issuance of a summons to bring a party into court, nor on the other hand can. this finding or order be collaterally attacked.

Judgment affirmed.

Swing and Giffen, JJ., concur.

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

SMITH, J.

The judgment recovered against Minnie Flesher by William F. Wagner and the lien acquired upon her real estate inherited from her mother, Ottilia Seitz, under Secs. 5377 and 5378 Rev. Stat., were not improperly set up in the probate court in the suit to sell the real estate of Ottilia Seitz to pay .debts.

Section 6145 Rev. Stat. provides for the determination of the equities between parties as well as the priorities of liens, and the order of the probate court merely found that the judgment of Wagner was a lien upon the interest of Minnie Flesher in the premises to be sold, and the administrator was ordered to pay the same from the balance due Minnie Flesher.

This was not such a proceeding on a cross petition asking affirmative relief as would require the issuance of a summons to bring a party into court, nor on the other hand can. this finding or order be collaterally attacked.

Judgment affirmed.

Swing and Giffen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-seitz-ohiocirct-1908.