Legal Opinion

Stroppel v. Plageman

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

Decided October 15, 1905Published

1Opinion of the Court

The defendant in error was the plaintiff below. The action there brought was for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real and personal estate, made by the decedent a few days prior to his death. The issue as tried necessitated the consideration of a number of defenses to the contract among which were:

1. That the consideration named and set forth in the contract was grossly inadequate.

2. That the decedent at the time of the making of the contract was non compos mentis.

Upon the issues, the court below entered a decree for the plaintiff. This proceeding is to reverse such finding.

I…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hildebrand & Posner v. Bloodsworth, Whitley & RidenourOregon Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Leonard v. CraneIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
  3. O'Flynn v. HolmesMichigan Supreme Court · 1859

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

Powered by the Exa API