Voss v. Loomis

Hamilton Circuit Court

Voss v. Loomis

1 Ohio Cir. Dec. 12

DecidedFebruary 15, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Ohio Cir. Dec. 12 (Voss v. Loomis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Voss v. Loomis, 1 Ohio Cir. Dec. 12 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Cox, J.

1. The probate court has jurisdiction to compel an assignee or trustee to-account for money and property in his hands for distribution, and for failure to-do so, an action on his bond may be brought when there is an order of that court fixing his liability and ordering the money to be paid, or on failure of the assignee to file and settle his account, or deliver to his successor all property and effects belonging to the trustee.

2. Under sec. 6341, Rev. Stat., providing that the successor of a trustee or assignee failing to deliver over to the successor trust property, may proceed against such trustee or assignee by action in the “common pleas or otherwise,”' the successor may bring his action in the superior court.

3. In an action on such bond, a joint suit against all the obligors is the only remedy, and it is error for the court to render a several judgment against one or-more, leaving the action to proceed against the others. Board of Education v. Miner, 23 O. S., 211, 243; Roby v. Rainsberger, 27 O. S., 674.

Judgment of the superior court reversed.

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

Cox, J.

1. The probate court has jurisdiction to compel an assignee or trustee to-account for money and property in his hands for distribution, and for failure to-do so, an action on his bond may be brought when there is an order of that court fixing his liability and ordering the money to be paid, or on failure of the assignee to file and settle his account, or deliver to his successor all property and effects belonging to the trustee.

2. Under sec. 6341, Rev. Stat., providing that the successor of a trustee or assignee failing to deliver over to the successor trust property, may proceed against such trustee or assignee by action in the “common pleas or otherwise,”' the successor may bring his action in the superior court.

3. In an action on such bond, a joint suit against all the obligors is the only remedy, and it is error for the court to render a several judgment against one or-more, leaving the action to proceed against the others. Board of Education v. Miner, 23 O. S., 211, 243; Roby v. Rainsberger, 27 O. S., 674.

Judgment of the superior court reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Ohio Cir. Dec. 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voss-v-loomis-ohcircthamilton-1885.