Legal Opinion

Shelton v. Gill

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1842PublishedCited by 22 opinions

This is a bill of chancery, from the county of Pike. The bill is filed by the complainants, setting forth a loan of money from the respondent, Joseph Gill, at a rate of interest of ten and twelve per centum per annum, and which the answer shows, from time to time, liquidated and paid, as the time was extended for the' payment of the original loan.

Read the full summary

This is a bill of chancery, from the county of Pike. The bill is filed by the complainants, setting forth a loan of money from the respondent, Joseph Gill, at a rate of interest of ten and twelve per centum per annum, and which the answer shows, from time to time, liquidated and paid, as the time was extended for the' payment of the original loan. The loan was $4,500, for which a bond was executed, with a warrant of attorney to confess a judgment for the amount due, with two and a half per centum, as attorney’s fees, for collection, and on which judgment was rendered for the balance due,…

1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.

Are the complainants entitled to relief? It seems to us, upon one of the most familiar maxims of equity jurisprudence, the complainants make no case. He who seeks equity, must do equity. The complainants, in this bill, have no averment that they have offered to pay the amount which is admitted to be due, nor do they bring such money into court. Without this allegation, there is no pretense for sustaining this bill. In the many cases of this character, which have been adjudicated ■upon the circuit within the last few years, not one is within our recollection in which the bill has not contained…

2Cited by22 opinions

  1. Indianapolis & Greenfield Rapid Transit Co. v. ForemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Columbus & Indianapolis Central Railway Co. v. ArnoldIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Doyle v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  4. Ewald v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Putnam v. Pacific Monthly Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1913

17 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