Lippert v. Wirt

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Lippert v. Wirt

32 Ohio C.C. Dec. 233, 17 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 469, 1911 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 342

Cuyahoga Circuit Court·Decided June 2, 1911·Published

Opinion

HENRY, J.

When the plaintiff in error disobeyed the order of the court of common pleas to give an additional undertaking for his appeal [234] of the cause from a justice of the peace, the proper remedy was dismissal of the appeal. Instead, the court of common pleas granted his adversary’s motion to strike off his answer and render judgment as upon default. The result of either procedure being the same, both as to the parties to the action and the sureties on the appeal bond, no prejudice can ensue from allowing the judgment as rendered to stand.

Affirmed.

Marvin and Winch, JJ., concur.

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

HENRY, J.

When the plaintiff in error disobeyed the order of the court of common pleas to give an additional undertaking for his appeal [234] of the cause from a justice of the peace, the proper remedy was dismissal of the appeal. Instead, the court of common pleas granted his adversary’s motion to strike off his answer and render judgment as upon default. The result of either procedure being the same, both as to the parties to the action and the sureties on the appeal bond, no prejudice can ensue from allowing the judgment as rendered to stand.

Affirmed.

Marvin and Winch, JJ., concur.

Lippert v. Wirt, 32 Ohio C.C. Dec. 233, 17 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 469, 1911 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 342 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1911).

Pincite

32 Ohio C.C. Dec. 233 (Lippert v. Wirt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.