Legal Opinion

Oleff, Admr. v. Hodapp, Gdn.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 1935No. 24945PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.

There are but two questions in this case, as we view it:

First, did Tego acquire a vested interest in the moneys on deposit with the building and loan company, by virtue of the joint and survivorship contract?

Second, if he did acquire a vested interest therein, does the law or the public policy of the state of Ohio divest him of such interest?

The rights of Tego are largely determined by Section 9648, General Code:

“To receive money on deposits, and all persons, firms, corporations and courts, their agents, officers and appointees may make such deposits and stock deposits, but such corporation…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Cleveland Trust Co. v. ScobieOhio Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Bradley v. FoxIllinois Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Wright v. BloomOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Smith v. GreenburgSupreme Court of Colorado · 1950
  4. Budwit v. HerrMichigan Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Vesey v. VeseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952

34 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