Legal Opinion

Schurch, Trustees v. Harraman

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 28, 1933No. 140PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By GUERNSEY, J.

It will be noted that the only condition relating to the use of the premises, differing from an ordinary form of deed, is contained in the habendum clause, and that the granting clause runs to the grantees, thoir heirs and assigns forever; and that the habendum clause, except for the provision “so long as said lot is held and used for church purposes,” runs to the grantees and their successors; both clauses, except for said provision, being in the ordinary form of a conveyance of an estate in fee simple.

The basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in this ease is that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Young v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1880

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. First Presbyterian Church v. TarrOhio Court of Appeals · 1939
  2. Burdette v. JonesTuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas · 1947
  3. Burk v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Koprivec v. Rails-to-Trails of Wayne Cty. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Mid Ohio Coal Co. v. BrownOhio Court of Appeals · 2018

4 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