Ulman, Einstein & Co. v. Effinger

Stark Circuit Court

Ulman, Einstein & Co. v. Effinger

20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 791

DecidedJuly 1, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 791 (Ulman, Einstein & Co. v. Effinger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Stark Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ulman, Einstein & Co. v. Effinger, 20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 791 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

ADAMS, J.

First. A judgment may be set aside for fraud notwithstanding •the fact that no defense was made at the time it' was rendered, although the defendant was properly served with summons by copy thereof left at her usual place of residence.

Second. A judgment procured against a party on an account which she never owed, nor,became either directly or indirectly liable for its payment, constitutes a fraud on the court -rendering such judgment, which should be set aside in a proper proceeding brought for that purpose.

[792]*792Third. An averment in a petition that goods or merchandise were' sold to a husband, and that afterwards and before suit is brought to recover the price thereof, the plaintiffs inserted the name of the wife of such husband in said account, and without her knowledge or consent, is a sufficient averment of fraud to constitute a cause of action and a demurrer to such petition and pertinent interrogatories attached thereto is properly overruled.

Pomerene and Douglass, JJ., concur.

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

ADAMS, J.

First. A judgment may be set aside for fraud notwithstanding •the fact that no defense was made at the time it' was rendered, although the defendant was properly served with summons by copy thereof left at her usual place of residence.

Second. A judgment procured against a party on an account which she never owed, nor,became either directly or indirectly liable for its payment, constitutes a fraud on the court -rendering such judgment, which should be set aside in a proper proceeding brought for that purpose.

[792]*792Third. An averment in a petition that goods or merchandise were' sold to a husband, and that afterwards and before suit is brought to recover the price thereof, the plaintiffs inserted the name of the wife of such husband in said account, and without her knowledge or consent, is a sufficient averment of fraud to constitute a cause of action and a demurrer to such petition and pertinent interrogatories attached thereto is properly overruled.

Pomerene and Douglass, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 791, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ulman-einstein-co-v-effinger-ohcirctstark-1898.