Legal Opinion

Harlan v. Capital Investment Co.

Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County

Decided January 6, 1911Published

1Opinion of the CourtHunt, J.

This is an action- brought to recover money lost by the plaintiff at gaming. An attachment was issued upon the ground that the defendant was a foreign corporation. A motion has been made to discharge the attachment on the ground that the debt or demand does-not arise upon contract.

The’ recognition in law of constructive contracts, that is, of contracts founded not on the mutual understanding of the parties, express or implied-as a question of fact, but implied by law, is too well settled to require authority other than Railroad v. Gaffney, 65 O. S., 104-116. That constructive contracts are…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Meech v. . StonerNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Woods v. AyresMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
  3. Burnham v. FisherSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
  4. McDougall v. WallingNew York Supreme Court · 1867
  5. Tallmadge v. PenoyerNew York Supreme Court · 1861

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

Powered by the Exa API