Home/Ohio Court of Appeals/Swing v. Swing

Swing v. Swing

4 Ohio Law. Abs. 283, 1925 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1012
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Swing v. Swing. Read the opinion of the Court — 24 Ohio App. 464 →
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided November 30, 1925·No. No. 2700·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The action in Hamilton Common Pleas was for partition. The Miami Savings & Loan Co. filed an answer and cross petition, praying for judgment.

Partition was abondoned, and judgment entered foreclosing the mortgage of the Savings & Loan Co. but not permitting assessing the attorneys fees. Error was prosecuted from this judgment, and the Court of Appeals held:

A court is not authorized to allow fees to counsel for a mortgage when the property is sold in foreclosure.-

Judgment affirmed.

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

Swing v. Swing, 4 Ohio Law. Abs. 283, 1925 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1012 (Ohio Ct. App. 1925).

4 Ohio Law. Abs. 283 (Swing v. Swing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.