Price v. Hathaway

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Price v. Hathaway

25 Ohio C.C. Dec. 612, 16 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 559, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 401

DecidedMay 20, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 25 Ohio C.C. Dec. 612 (Price v. Hathaway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Cuyahoga Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Price v. Hathaway, 25 Ohio C.C. Dec. 612, 16 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 559, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 401 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

HENRY, J.

The petition in error in this canse was filed after the expiration of four months from the rendition of the judgment, but within four months from the overruling of -the motion for a new trial. In the trial of the action below the parties waived a jury and submitted their cause to the decision of the court. Section 5326 R. S. (Sec. 11599 G. C.) has no application, therefore, so as to postpone the rendition of the judgment until after the overruling of the motion for a new trial. That section provides, “that when a trial by a jury has been had,” this procedure is proper. Here there was no trial by jury, nor can it be said that when the right of trial by jury is waived there is anything analogous to a verdict as distinguished from a judgment to be rendered by the court. Section 5326 R. S. can not apply by analogy to the case before us. The petition in error having been filed too late is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Marvin, J.. concurs.

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

HENRY, J.

The petition in error in this canse was filed after the expiration of four months from the rendition of the judgment, but within four months from the overruling of -the motion for a new trial. In the trial of the action below the parties waived a jury and submitted their cause to the decision of the court. Section 5326 R. S. (Sec. 11599 G. C.) has no application, therefore, so as to postpone the rendition of the judgment until after the overruling of the motion for a new trial. That section provides, “that when a trial by a jury has been had,” this procedure is proper. Here there was no trial by jury, nor can it be said that when the right of trial by jury is waived there is anything analogous to a verdict as distinguished from a judgment to be rendered by the court. Section 5326 R. S. can not apply by analogy to the case before us. The petition in error having been filed too late is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Marvin, J.. concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 Ohio C.C. Dec. 612, 16 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 559, 1907 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/price-v-hathaway-ohcirctcuyahoga-1907.