Legal Opinion

Chenault v. Gray

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided January 6, 1933No. Nos 2218 & 2219PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

BY THE COURT

The question presented is: Does the petition state a cause of action against defendants?

The office of Superintendent of Banks, the duties and obligations of the incumbent are creatures of statute. In conducting the office, the superintendent in many particulars acts as a quasi judicial officer, having wide powers of discretion in determining the course he shall pursue. As to any official act which comes within the classification of a quasi judicial function, his action can not be challenged, unless it be averred that he acted from wilful, corrupt or malicious motives. As to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Deatsch v. FairfieldArizona Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Chicago & Southeastern Railway Co. v. KenneyIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Sanders State Bank v. HawkinsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  4. State ex rel. Allen v. Title Guaranty & Surety Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Pope v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1921

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Squire v. AbbottOhio Court of Appeals · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API