Legal Opinion

Gowdy v. Roberts

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 24, 1929No. 1621PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPardee, J.

The plaintiff in error claims that the sixty-day period provided in said section, does not start from the day the original summons was issued, which was not served, but starts on the 29th day of January, 1929, that being the day the sheriff made his return of the original summons and the first time that the plaintiff in error became chargeable with notice that service had not been procured. The plaintiff in error, claims that he made a diligent effort to procure a service when he filed his precipe and had a summons issued, in which precipe he set forth the city address of said defendant in…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Crabbe v. JonesTuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas · 1945
  2. Kleinhenz v. KleinhenzOhio Court of Appeals · 1936
  3. Bender v. BenderOhio Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. Mohn v. StateOhio Court of Appeals · 1930
  5. National Bond & Inv Co. v. Midland Acceptance Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API