Wilkinson v. Daniel

Ohio Supreme Court

Wilkinson v. Daniel

1 Wright 368, 1 Ohio Ch. 368

DecidedAugust 15, 1833

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wright 368 (Wilkinson v. Daniel) 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

Wilkinson v. Daniel, 1 Wright 368, 1 Ohio Ch. 368 (Ohio 1833).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT.

There was no issue here to try, and the court below erred m ordering the cause on to trial without; the verdict is a. nullity; 5 O. 277.

The court were also in error in refusing the motion in arrest, because not filed within its rule. Our courts have power only to make rules not repugnant to the law (29 O. I. 73); and the law provides (29 O. L. 72) that motions for new trial shall be first made, and if denied, the defendant may then move in arrest of judgment. In this case, the new trial was not denied until the second day after the verdict, and the defendant could not before move in arrest, without waiving his motion for a new trial, or violating the law; the rule must have been adopted inadvertently; it is of no effect when used to contravene the law.

The* judgment is reversed with costs, and the cause remanded to be reinstated and proceeded in.

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

BY THE COURT.

There was no issue here to try, and the court below erred m ordering the cause on to trial without; the verdict is a. nullity; 5 O. 277.

The court were also in error in refusing the motion in arrest, because not filed within its rule. Our courts have power only to make rules not repugnant to the law (29 O. I. 73); and the law provides (29 O. L. 72) that motions for new trial shall be first made, and if denied, the defendant may then move in arrest of judgment. In this case, the new trial was not denied until the second day after the verdict, and the defendant could not before move in arrest, without waiving his motion for a new trial, or violating the law; the rule must have been adopted inadvertently; it is of no effect when used to contravene the law.

The* judgment is reversed with costs, and the cause remanded to be reinstated and proceeded in.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wright 368, 1 Ohio Ch. 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkinson-v-daniel-ohio-1833.