Union County Savings & Loan Co. v. King

*522OPINION

By BARNES, J.

We think the law is well defined in Ohio that the right of reviver will depend in the first instance on the expressed intent of the parties; but in the absence of the expressed intent and where the lienholder acts in ignorance of the intervening lien, it will be presumed that he did not intend to release his prior lien and equity will reinstate his priority. This is the direct announcement in the case of Turner Bau-Verein No. 3 v Dahlheimer et, 2 Nisi Prius, 248. While this is the decision of the Court of Common Pleas and in some jurisdictions will not be accepted as a…