Legal Opinion

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Silvestro

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 1932No. 23111Published

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The facts stated present a single question of law, which is whether an action to recover upon a bond given to secure an injunction preventing the sale of property taken upon execution to satisfy a judgment may be maintained by the assignee of such judgment; he being the owner thereof at the time the injunction was procured.

It is conceded that Amorosi was not the owner of the judgment at the time the injunction suit was instituted. It had been assigned to Silvestro three days prior thereto, and Silvestro was made a party to the injunction suit subsequent to the issuance of the injunction.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Schlieman v. BowlinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  2. Ullmann v. KlineIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Southern Surety Co. v. ChambersOhio Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Van Gorder v. LundySupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
  5. Conoway v. CarnallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API