Legal Opinion

Langel v. Moore

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 1928No. 21051PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.

It is the position of the plaintiff in error that the Pataskala Banking Company’s claim should be paid out of the money realized from the sale of the real estate, as well as the money received from the sale of the chattel property, in the proportion that the amount available from each bears to the entire debt of the Pataskala Banking Company; the theory of the plaintiff in error being that the Pataskala Banking Company has two funds to which it may look for payment of its claim, and that, therefore, such funds should be subject to the payment of the banking company’s claim in such way as to…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Beacon Distributors, Inc., BankruptCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1971
  2. In Re Lustron Corp. La Fayette Steel Co. v. Lustron CorpCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
  3. Homan, Assignee v. MichlesOhio Court of Appeals · 1963
  4. In re Leviton Construction Co.United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API