Thornton v. Sprague

1 Wright 645, 1 Ohio Ch. 645
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1834
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 645 (Thornton v. Sprague) 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
Thornton v. Sprague, 1 Wright 645, 1 Ohio Ch. 645 (Ohio 1834).

Opinion

WOOD, J.

The finding should follow the issues and respond to all that are material, and a failure is fatal: (5 O. 108.) But this first issue of non c&pit is immaterial under our law and has been so adjudged. The issue being of no moment the finding upon it secures no legal consequence- — the first objection therefore fails.

The statute (29 O. L. 129) expressly requires of the jury in replevin to assess the damages — including the value if they find for the defendant. The objection has no weight under our law, whatever it might have under that of some other state.

*The remaining question calls upon us to determine whether [646 the court taking the verdict has power to reduce it to form? This court has expressly decided this point in several cases: (2 O. 32; 3 O. 384; 5 O. 238, 260.) The act of the court appears to us nothing but reducing the verdict to form, and to be justified. The finding on the second issue is sufficient to warrant the judgment.

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

Related

Farnum v. Loomis
2 Or. 29 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1861)
Gold Hill Quartz Mining Co. v. Ish
5 Or. 104 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1873)
Knott v. James B.
5 Or. 235 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1874)
Russell v. Lewis
3 Or. 380 (Benton County Circuit Court, Oregon, 1871)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Wright 645, 1 Ohio Ch. 645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thornton-v-sprague-ohio-1834.