Wall v. Dayton Federation Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
The record discloses that the plaintiff -asked for a money judgment for money had and received on alleged misrepresentations and violation of contract. We deem it well settled that, where a petition asks for a money judgment, and pleads facts necessary for establishing such right, and an answer is filed which raises issues of fact upon which either party might demand a jury trial, such cause is a law action and not a chancery case. Section 11379, General Code, recites in part: “Issues of fact arising in actions for the recovery of money only, or specific real or personal property, shall be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Forest City Investment Co. v. HaasOhio Supreme Court · 1924
- Murray v. International Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
3Cited by12 opinions
- Davies v. Columbia Gas & Electric Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1949
- Ireland v. CheneyOhio Supreme Court · 1935
- Channel Dry, Inc. v. HaverOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
- J. P. Loomis Coal & Supply Co. v. GarchevOhio Supreme Court · 1931
- Liberal Market, Inc. v. Main-Nottingham Investment Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1954
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.