Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Fulton v. Bremer

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1935No. 25260PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.

The question here presented is clear cut. Do the laws of Ohio require the Superintendent of Banks to present a claim for super-added (sometimes called “double”) liability to an administrator or executor of a decedent’s estate for allowance or rejection?

If the law requires the presentation of such claim, the demurrer should be overruled and judgment should be rendered for the administratrix, as the statute of limitations that follows on the heels of the statute providing for such presentation effectually non-suits the Superintendent of Banks.

If the law does not require the Superintendent of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. United States v. BeebeSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  3. United States v. Des Moines Navigation & Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
  4. Curtner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  5. Anderson v. NawaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Stanley v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Squire, Supt. v. Grn. Trust Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1947
  3. State Ex Rel. Fulton v. CoburnOhio Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Rohrig v. WhitneySupreme Court of Iowa · 1944
  5. Squire, Supt. of Banks v. CramerOhio Court of Appeals · 1940

14 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