Legal Opinion

Hanley v. Esposito

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 3, 1928PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFarr, J.

There has been much discussion in argument and in briefs with reference to the rule announced in the case of Kiley v. Hall, 96 OS., 374, and it is claimed upon the one hand that the purchaser of a lot in an allotment whose deed contains restrictions as to the use of such lot is not chargeable from that fact alone With notice that like restrictions are contained in the deeds of other purchasers of lots in the allotment; while on the other hand, it is asserted that title to these lots resting in a common owner and who took title to the same, subject to the restrictions in question, that the…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fifth Third Bank v. CopeOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. Smith v. VolkOhio Court of Appeals · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API