H. S. Leyman Co. v. Piggly-Wiggly Corp.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*530OPINION
By MATTHEWS, J.:
It is recited in the notice of appeal in this case that the plaintiff appeals on both law and fact and an appeal bond was duly filed.
At the threshold a jurisdictional question is presented. In the order appealed from it is recited that “the plaintiff is not the real party in interest and has not the right to maintain this action” and on that ground a judgment of dismissal at the plaintiff’s costs was entered. As the Court found that the right of action was not owned by the plainitff, no decision was reached as to the merits of the cause of action. No decision on the_…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Titus v. WallickSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Sheridan v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Allen v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Spencer v. Standard Chemicals & Metals Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1924
- Meeker v. . ClaghornNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- De Garza v. ChetisterOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
- Diversified Property Corp. v. Winters Natl. Bank & Trust Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1967
- Renner v. Pennsylvania RailroadOhio Court of Appeals · 1951
- Bowers v. Viereck, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1953