Longworth v. Goforth
This text of 1 Wright 192 (Longworth v. Goforth) 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
The only ground on which the complainant can claim the interference of this court, is that of the defendant’s having at full age confirmed the sale. The title has been adjudged upon at law* and this court cannot review the decision of a court of law. The alleged settlement, receipt of money, &c., in confirmation of the sale, is denied in the answer, and there is no proof; besides, it appears that the defendant was a minor at the period referred to, and incapable of confirming the sale.
The bill is dismissed.
* This doubtless refers to Goforth's Lessee v. Longworth, 4 O. 129.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Wright 192, 1 Ohio Ch. 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/longworth-v-goforth-ohio-1833.