Taylor v. Foote's Administrators

Ohio Supreme Court

Taylor v. Foote's Administrators

1 Ohio Ch. 356

DecidedJune 15, 1833

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ohio Ch. 356 (Taylor v. Foote's Administrators) 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

Taylor v. Foote's Administrators, 1 Ohio Ch. 356 (Ohio 1833).

Pincite

Opinion

Bv the Court.

These notes, though not negotiable at law, so as to confer upon the assignee a right to sue in his own name, are held in equity as negotiated. The lien for the purchase money is a right of the vender, and cannot pass into other hands as an incident to the obligations, or the land, if conveyed by the «vender; Jackman v. Hallock, 1 O. R. 319; and Tiernan v. Beam, 2 O. R. 383, are conclusive on this point; so is Williams v. Roberts, 5 O. R. 35.

The bill is dismissed.

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

Bv the Court.

These notes, though not negotiable at law, so as to confer upon the assignee a right to sue in his own name, are held in equity as negotiated. The lien for the purchase money is a right of the vender, and cannot pass into other hands as an incident to the obligations, or the land, if conveyed by the «vender; Jackman v. Hallock, 1 O. R. 319; and Tiernan v. Beam, 2 O. R. 383, are conclusive on this point; so is Williams v. Roberts, 5 O. R. 35.

The bill is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ohio Ch. 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-footes-administrators-ohio-1833.