Legal Opinion

McCarty v. Lingham

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1924No. 18493PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C. J.

We have before us the opinions of the Courts of Appeals on the first and second review, and, upon examination of the per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals of the Eighth district upon the first review, it clearly appears that the court decided that the petition contained a good cause of action, and that the purchase clause in the lease implied that Mrs. McCarty should convey a merchantable title, free from incumbrance, with a release of inchoate dower of her husband, and that the sum of $7,500' should be payment in full for such title. Upon the remand, the trial court in entering judgment…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Gohman v. City of St. BernardOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Goodlett v. HansellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
  3. Peoples' Savings Bank Co. v. ParisetteOhio Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Justice v. ButtonNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
  5. McCord v. MasseyIllinois Supreme Court · 1895

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Roesch v. BrayOhio Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. Father's House Internatl., Inc. v. KurguzOhio Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. American National InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1974
  4. Horton v. MathenyOhio Court of Appeals · 1943
  5. Potts v. Moran's ExecutorsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1930

11 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