Uricich v. Kolesar
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff obtained a judgment against the defendant and thereafter instituted proceedings in aid of execution wherein the county of Cuyahoga and John J. Boyle, county treasurer, were named as garnishees. A motion to quash service was filed by the garnishees. The court sustained the motion on the ground that the judgment debtor was a county employee. In effect the court held that the county, or county officers acting in its behalf, cannot be made garnishees. Error proceedings were instituted in this court seeking a reversal of the ruling of the Common Pleas Court.
We are asked to interpret…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. MauriceU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Virginia · 1823
- Durham v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Waterbury v. Board of CommissionersMontana Supreme Court · 1891
- Bazzoli v. LarsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1931
- Southern Ohio Finance Corp. v. WahlOhio Court of Appeals · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- H & A Selmer, Inc. v. Industrial CommissionCity of Cleveland Municipal Court · 1937
- In re Municipal Authorities, Pennsylvania Department of Justice1941