Yoho v. McGovern
Ohio Supreme Court
ERROR to the District Court of Noble county. On June 2,1877, Thomas McGovern commenced an action, as indorsee, before a justice of the peace upon a joint note made by Reuben Yoho and Jacob 0. Yoho, dated February 2, 1877, whereby they promised to pay one hundred and ten dollars on the 1st day of June next after date. Summons was served upon Reuben, but as to Jacob it was returned not found, the latter being a non-resident of the county and making no appearance in the action.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court of Noble county. On June 2,1877, Thomas McGovern commenced an action, as indorsee, before a justice of the peace upon a joint note made by Reuben Yoho and Jacob 0. Yoho, dated February 2, 1877, whereby they promised to pay one hundred and ten dollars on the 1st day of June next after date. Summons was served upon Reuben, but as to Jacob it was returned not found, the latter being a non-resident of the county and making no appearance in the action. On June 8, 1877 (the return day), Reuben failed to appear and judgment was entered against him. Execution was stayed.…
1Opinion of the CourtOweN, J.
1. The plaintiff in error maintains that if the proceeding below was one to make him a party to the judgment rendered by the justice of the peace against Reuben, by virtue of section 5366 of the Revised Statutes, it ought not to have prevailed, for that the judgment was rendered upon a note not matured at the commencement of the action, that the three days of grace allowed the makers had not then expired. He relies upon Clinton Bank of Columbus v. Hart, 19 Ohio, 372, to support this position. In that case suit was originally brought by the bank upon a promissory note of which four persons…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Tappan v. BruenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Brown v. BirdsallNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- Rand v. NutterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1868
- Reynolds v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1876