Urbana Bank v. Baldwin

Ohio Supreme Court

Urbana Bank v. Baldwin

3 Ohio 65

DecidedDecember 15, 1827

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Ohio 65 (Urbana Bank v. Baldwin) 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

Urbana Bank v. Baldwin, 3 Ohio 65 (Ohio 1827).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court :

The case may be a hard one, but the law is clear in favor of the plaintiff’s lien. The suit was pending on the first day of the term, and when that is the case the judgment relates back to that day, no matter on what day oí the term it was confessed. There can be no reason for the court to restrain the words of the statute in this case that would not apply to every other. It does not follow that the lien must extend to the first day of the term if no process was then pending. It is sufficient, however, to decide that case when it comes up for decision.

The motion must be overruled.

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

By the Court :

The case may be a hard one, but the law is clear in favor of the plaintiff’s lien. The suit was pending on the first day of the term, and when that is the case the judgment relates back to that day, no matter on what day oí the term it was confessed. There can be no reason for the court to restrain the words of the statute in this case that would not apply to every other. It does not follow that the lien must extend to the first day of the term if no process was then pending. It is sufficient, however, to decide that case when it comes up for decision.

The motion must be overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Ohio 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urbana-bank-v-baldwin-ohio-1827.