Legal Opinion

Edge v. Stuckey

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 11, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BY THE COURT'

- It is suggested in one of the briefs of the defendant in error that the doctrine in Metzger v Ziesler, 13 N. P. (n.s.) 49, and City of Cincinnati v Archiable, 4 Oh Ap, 218, should be followed, to the end that a judgment can not be opened up during' term except under the conditions set forth in §11631 GC. That doctrine, which is elaborated in the Archiabie case, has been repudiated by the Supreme Court in First National Bank v Smith, 102 Oh St 120. The Smith case went to the Supreme Court ón certificate from the Court of Appeals of Allen'County, which court expressly refused to…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. McMillen v. Willard Garage, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1968
  2. Miller v. WilkinsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1963
  3. Peerless Paper Box Mfg. Co. v. MetzelOhio Court of Appeals · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API