Brownell, Keilmeier & Co. v. Harsh
Ohio Supreme Court
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Seneca county. Th^ plaintiffs obtained a decree of foreclosure and sale against one Cline, upon a junior mortgage which they held against him, making the senior lienholders also parties defendant in the action.
Read the full summary
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Seneca county. Th^ plaintiffs obtained a decree of foreclosure and sale against one Cline, upon a junior mortgage which they held against him, making the senior lienholders also parties defendant in the action. The cause was appealed to the district court, where-the plaintiffs asked to have a receiver of the mortgage property appointed, on the ground of its insufficiency to pay the mortgage and prior liens. At this stage of. the proceeding, an agreement in writing was entered into between Cline, Harsh, and the plaintiffs,…
1Opinion of the CourtWelch, C. J.
The ground taken in support of the judgments below is, that the contract between Harsh, Cline, and the plaintiffs did not bind Harsh, as between him and the plaintiffs, for the want of any sufficient consideration. It is claimed that the contract was what is called a “ novation,” and that in order to make it binding upon Harsh, it should have provided for the release of Cline from liability, and the relinquishment of the mortgage lien; that without such relinquishment, it was a mere voluntary agreement by Harsh to pay the debt of Cline, without consideration.
*633We wholly dissent from this view…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Janell, Inc. v. WoodsOhio Court of Appeals · 1980
- Fisk v. ReserSupreme Court of Colorado · 1893