Home/Ohio Court of Appeals/Walton v. Wilkins

Walton v. Wilkins

16 Ohio Law. Abs. 318, 1933 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1508
Ohio Court of Appeals·Decided April 21, 1933·No. No 2233·Published

Opinion

OPINION

By THE COURT

Submitted, on application of defendant in error for rehearing.

We have examined the case to which our attention has been directed, namely, Jus[319]*319tina Gardner v Hengenold, 6 O.D. (Reprint), 997. We do not And that the la\v of this case, so far as it was required to be enunciated by the facts, is in conflict with our decision. We do not believe that the doctrine of merger has such application to the facts in this case as to prevent Walton from asserting his defense against Wilkins.

The application for rehearing will therefore be overruled.

HORNBECK, PJ, KUNKLE and BARNES, JJ.

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

Walton v. Wilkins, 16 Ohio Law. Abs. 318, 1933 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1508 (Ohio Ct. App. 1933).

16 Ohio Law. Abs. 318 (Walton v. Wilkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.