Skiles v. Leary

Ohio Supreme Court

Skiles v. Leary

90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 460

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 16, 1914

DocketNo. 13814

StatusPublished

This text of 90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 460 (Skiles v. Leary) 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

Skiles v. Leary, 90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 460 (Ohio 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error. See journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed and this court finds that the said circuit court erred in finding and adjudging that the railroad scales and tracks in question are trade fixtures properly in the hands .of the receiver for sale as personal property.

This court further finds that the motion of the said Skiles to require the receiver to eliminate and emit from the sale the said property should have been sustained.

It is further ordered and adjudged that this cause be remanded to the court of appeals of Hamilton county, Ohio, with instructions to sustain the motion of said Skiles above referred to, and for further proceedings according to law.

Nichols, C. J., Shauck, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker and Wilkin, JJ., concur.

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

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error. See journal entry.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed and this court finds that the said circuit court erred in finding and adjudging that the railroad scales and tracks in question are trade fixtures properly in the hands .of the receiver for sale as personal property.

This court further finds that the motion of the said Skiles to require the receiver to eliminate and emit from the sale the said property should have been sustained.

It is further ordered and adjudged that this cause be remanded to the court of appeals of Hamilton county, Ohio, with instructions to sustain the motion of said Skiles above referred to, and for further proceedings according to law.

Nichols, C. J., Shauck, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker and Wilkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 Ohio St. (N.S.) 460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skiles-v-leary-ohio-1914.