Chapin v. Longworth
Ohio Supreme Court
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to reverse the judgment of the District Court of Van Wert county. Chapin commenced an action in the court of common pleas of Yan Wert county, against Longworth and Doran, Deniston & Bros., but dismissed as to the firm without prejudice.
Read the full summary
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to reverse the judgment of the District Court of Van Wert county. Chapin commenced an action in the court of common pleas of Yan Wert county, against Longworth and Doran, Deniston & Bros., but dismissed as to the firm without prejudice. The petition is in substance as follows: May, 4, 1872, Chapiu and Doran, Deniston & Bros, entered into a contract in writing, under seal, whereby Chapin agreed that the firm should have the use and control of the patterns and models for a lathe he had invented, and the right to manufacture the lathe for its own use,…
1Opinion of the CourtOkey, J.
The objection urged by Longworth is, that no privity of contract between him and Chapin is disclosed in the petition. And the objection' is well taken. The contract is executory. It is for the performance of particular personal services by Chapin for Doran, Deniston & Bros., at a specified rate to be paid each week. Such a contract is not assignable. Metcalf on Con. 189; Burrill on Assignments (3d ed.) 130, n. (7); Grant v. Ludlow, 8 Ohio St. 1-37; Farrow v. Wilson, L. R. 4 C. P. 744. If the petition contained an averment that Chapin accepted Longworth. as employer, and released the firm, the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of St. Louisex rel. Sullivan v. ClemensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Cummings v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1871