Richards v. Fridley

Ohio Supreme Court

Richards v. Fridley

1 Wright 167, 1 Ohio Ch. 167

DecidedNovember 15, 1832

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 167 (Richards v. Fridley) 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.

Bluebook

Richards v. Fridley, 1 Wright 167, 1 Ohio Ch. 167 (Ohio 1832).

Pincite

Opinion

WRIGHT, J.

It is not easy to conceive a more gross and iniquitous fraud, than that this demurrer admits to have been practised by Jacob Fridley. We might, in someway, aid the object of this fraud, if we sustained the demurrer. The question of relief can be raised again after answer. We suggest the withdrawal of the demurrer, and that the complainant have leave to amend her bill, and the defendant to answer.

This was done.

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

WRIGHT, J.

It is not easy to conceive a more gross and iniquitous fraud, than that this demurrer admits to have been practised by Jacob Fridley. We might, in someway, aid the object of this fraud, if we sustained the demurrer. The question of relief can be raised again after answer. We suggest the withdrawal of the demurrer, and that the complainant have leave to amend her bill, and the defendant to answer.

This was done.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 167, 1 Ohio Ch. 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-fridley-ohio-1832.