Legal Opinion

Koogler v. Koogler

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 1933No. 23987PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephenson, J.

The plea in abatement in civil cases in Ohio, while novel because it is unusual, is a perfectly good plea, and, in cases where it is permissible and proper, it should be encouraged, as it is a minimizer of time and expense.

We note that the Trustees of Mad River Lodge No. 243, I. O. O. F., were made parties defendant herein. There are no allegations in the amended petition from which we can ascertain any particular reason why they should be made defendants. We assume that because they ordinarily represent the lodge they were regarded as proper parties defendant. The lodge has been treated by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McMahon v. . RauhrNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  2. Shurtleff v. StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 1879
  3. Gilbert v. Crystal Fountain LodgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1887
  4. Huth v. Humboldt Stamm, No. 153Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1891

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Marshall v. International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Marchitto v. Central R. Co. of NJSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
  3. Lyons v. LyonsOhio Supreme Court · 1965
  4. State v. Fremont Lodge of Loyal Order of MooseOhio Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Murphy v. KeatingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API