State ex rel. Alexander v. Oviatt

Summit Circuit Court

State ex rel. Alexander v. Oviatt

8 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 567

DecidedOctober 15, 1906

StatusPublished

This text of 8 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 567 (State ex rel. Alexander v. Oviatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Summit Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Alexander v. Oviatt, 8 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 567 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COUNTY DEPOSITORIES ACT.

Situs of Corporations—Where Banks Having Branches in Different Counties are “Situated,”—Constitutionality of the County Depositories Act—Mandamus—Injunction.

The county depository act is constitutional, and under its provisions only banks which have their situs in the county are eligible as bidders for the public funds of that county.

We have examined this ease with care, and have read the opinion of Judge Wanamaker of the court of common pleas when the ease was tried before him. We do not think we can improve upon that opinion, and we reach the conclusion reached by him. The same order will be made here as ivas made in the court below.

Upon the opinion announced by Judge Wanamaker in the court of common pleas we pronounce the judgment that the injunction prayed for in the suit by Alexander be allowed, and the mandamus brought by the trust company be dismissed.

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

THE COUNTY DEPOSITORIES ACT.

Situs of Corporations—Where Banks Having Branches in Different Counties are “Situated,”—Constitutionality of the County Depositories Act—Mandamus—Injunction.

The county depository act is constitutional, and under its provisions only banks which have their situs in the county are eligible as bidders for the public funds of that county.

We have examined this ease with care, and have read the opinion of Judge Wanamaker of the court of common pleas when the ease was tried before him. We do not think we can improve upon that opinion, and we reach the conclusion reached by him. The same order will be made here as ivas made in the court below.

Upon the opinion announced by Judge Wanamaker in the court of common pleas we pronounce the judgment that the injunction prayed for in the suit by Alexander be allowed, and the mandamus brought by the trust company be dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-alexander-v-oviatt-ohcirctsummit-1906.