Moormann v. Voss
Ohio Supreme Court
Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati in general term. On May 23, 1901, the plaintiff in error, Rose F. Moormann, commenced an action in the Superior Court of Cincinnati against the defendants in error, John FI.
Read the full summary
Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati in general term. On May 23, 1901, the plaintiff in error, Rose F. Moormann, commenced an action in the Superior Court of Cincinnati against the defendants in error, John FI. Voss and Robert A. Moormann, to recover a balance of $2,161.18, which she alleged was due her from said Voss and Moormann, on a certain promissory note of which, omitting the indorsements thereon, the following is a copy: “$2,950.90. Cincinnati, May 11, 1896. “Six months after date we, or either of us, promise to pay to the order of William D. Grote, two thousand, nine hundred and…
1Opinion of the CourtCrew, J.
It clearly and affirmatively appearing from the record herein, that the only matter considered or adjudicated in this case by the superior court in general term, was that of the sufficiency of the notice given by John PT. Voss as surety, it follows that our present' inquiry must be limited to a consideration of the propriety and correctness of the judgment of the superior court in that behalf. John H. Voss, as surety, claimed to be discharged and released from all liability upon the note in suit, by reason of the delay of Rose *279F. Moormann to commence an action thereon within a reasonable time…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Halstead v. BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
- Baker v. KelloggOhio Supreme Court · 1876
- Hunt v. . PurdyNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Gillilan v. LudingtonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1873
- Sapington v. JeffriesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1852
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.