Legal Opinion

Grant v. Kinney

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 1927No. 20519PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

Section 8621, General Code, commonly known as the statute of frauds, provides:

“No action shall be brought whereby to charge the defendant, upon a special promise, to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage, of another person; * * * unless the agreement upon which such action is brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, is in writing, and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or some other person thereunto by him or her lawfully authorized.”

The question determinative of this case, as stated by counsel for plaintiff in error, is whether the “verbal agreement alleged by the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Emerson v. SlaterSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
  2. Manning v. AnthonyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  3. Frohardt Bros. v. DuffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  4. Johnson v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  5. Winn v. HillyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wilson Floors Co. v. Sciota Park, Ltd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Wolf v. FriedmanOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Strange v. MaloneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API