Mignery v. Olmstead
This text of 91 Ohio St. (N.S.) 416 (Mignery v. Olmstead) 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
Judgment affirmed.
See journal entry.
It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said court of appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed; this court being of the opinion that while the trial court erred in the admission of the testimony of the heirs of the decedent yet this testimony was not prejudicial for the reason that plaintiff in error having selected his remedy when he prepared and presented his claim against the estate of James Mignery, deceased, he could not maintain an action upon the instrument in question for the land.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 Ohio St. (N.S.) 416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mignery-v-olmstead-ohio-1915.