Legal Opinion

Haggard v. Shick

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1949No. 31678PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaft, J.

One of the four makers was deceased at the time the judgment by confession was taken. Therefore, if the warrant of attorney is construed as authorizing merely the confession of a joint judgment against the makers, there was no authority to confess any judgment against any one or more of the makers. Hoffmaster v. G. M. McKelvey Co., 88 Ohio St., 552, 106 N. E., 1061. On the other hand, if the warrant of attorney is construed as authorizing confession of a joint and several judgment, then the warrant might have justified confession of judgment against the plaintiffs herein who were sui juris at…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Frey v. Cleveland Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1944

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Sutton Bank v. Progressive Polymers, L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Henry Bierce Co. v. HuntDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1964
  3. Alliance First National Bank v. SpiesOhio Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Lathrem v. ForemanOhio Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Peoples Banking Co. v. Brumfield Hay & Grain Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API