Legal Opinion

Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District v. Funk

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 1938No. 26878PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The storm center of the present re view is the fact that the defendants’ fee simple title is subject to a five-year lease permitting the removal of certain sand and gravel deposits from 25 acres thereof. ~ Under the amended petition the lessees are no longer parties to this action for the reason that the plaintiff has effected a settlement with them whereby they retain the right to remove sand and gravel upon payment of the stipulated price to the defendants as' the lessors during the unexpired portion of their lease.

The plaintiff insists that the trial court was in error in the…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hake v. George Wiedemann Brewing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1970
  2. In Re Appropriation of Easement for Highway Purposes Over Property of Moores Lime Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1958
  3. Steiner v. CusterOhio Supreme Court · 1940
  4. In Re AppropriationOhio Court of Appeals · 1958
  5. Steiner v. CusterOhio Court of Appeals · 1939

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