Burrows v. Hussong
Cuyahoga Circuit Court
Error to Cuyahoga Common Pleas Court. Estill v. Fox, 23 Ky. (18 Am. Dee., 213) ; Woodson v. Gordon, 7 Tenn., 196 (14 Am. Dec., 743) ; Ellmore v. Hoffman, 2 Ashm. (Pa.), 159; Commonwealth v. Bennett, 16 Serg. & R. (Pa.), 243; Cooper-v. Roicley, 29 Ohio -St., 547; Hoss v. Layton, 3 Ohio St.. 352. 14 Enc. Law (2 Ed.), 625; Mecch v. Bioner, 19 N. Y., 26; McDougall v. Walling, 48 Barb.. 364; Collins v. Ragrew, 15 Johns., 5; 8 Enc.
Read the full summary
Error to Cuyahoga Common Pleas Court. Estill v. Fox, 23 Ky. (18 Am. Dee., 213) ; Woodson v. Gordon, 7 Tenn., 196 (14 Am. Dec., 743) ; Ellmore v. Hoffman, 2 Ashm. (Pa.), 159; Commonwealth v. Bennett, 16 Serg. & R. (Pa.), 243; Cooper-v. Roicley, 29 Ohio -St., 547; Hoss v. Layton, 3 Ohio St.. 352. 14 Enc. Law (2 Ed.), 625; Mecch v. Bioner, 19 N. Y., 26; McDougall v. Walling, 48 Barb.. 364; Collins v. Ragrew, 15 Johns., 5; 8 Enc. Law (2 Ed.), 239, 247; Davis’ Appeal, 39 Conn., 395; Bump, Fraud. Convey. (3 Ed.), 508; Cannon v. Cheney, 8 C. C., 143 (affirming Cheney v. Camion, 35 Bull., 313);…
1Opinion of the Court
Lura A. Hussong brought her action in the common pleas court to compel George H. Burrows, as assignee for the benefit of the creditors of the firm of Johnson, Walther & Co., to allow her alleged claim against said estate.
In her petition she sets forth that -the partnership was indebted to her for money had and received to her use, won of her at gaming by said partnership and by her paid to them between October 25, 1904, and April 17, 1905, inclusive, whereby an action accrued to her under the statute against gaming.
She further shows that said partnership made an assignment to plaintiff in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cooper v. RowleyOhio Supreme Court · 1876
- Estill v. FoxCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1828