Legal Opinion

Oglesbee v. Miller, Exr.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1932No. 23079PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.

The sole question presented hy the present record is whether or not, under the allegations of the petition, the action is one in chancery or at law. The right to the forfeiture of the life estate is based upon the terms of the will of Martha Seiver Oglesbee, and the trial court by its conclusion found that there was a violation of the terms of the will, entitling the executor to the relief sought.

The executor also claims the benefit of Section 8593, General Code, which reads as follows: “A tenant for life in real property, who commits or suffers waste thereto, shall forfeit that part of the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gearhart v. RichardsonOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Murray v. International Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
  3. Birmingham v. LesanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1885
  4. Crowley, Admr. v. CrowleyOhio Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Oglesbee v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 1924

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Henry H. Stambaugh Auditorium Ass'n v. City of YoungstownOhio Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Bradford v. MicklethwaiteOhio Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Perry v. PerryOhio Court of Appeals · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API