Legal Opinion

Burch v. Harte

Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati

Decided May 18, 1903Published

1Opinion of the CourtHosea, J.

The essential facts of tbe controversy are as follows:

The plaintiff claims the sum of $500 out of a sum of $1,000 in the hands of Harte, Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, by virtue of his office, being fees allowed the late Philip Kumler for services as referee in a certain suit. The claim is based on an assignment, in writing, from said Kumler dated September 28, 1899, and filed with said clerk.

*478Upon motion of the clerk an order of interpleader was duly entered, and Scott Bonham and C. D. Robertson, made defendants, have filed answers and cross-petitions — 'both the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

Dickerson v. TillinghastNew York Court of Chancery · 1833
Bliss v. . LawrenceNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of WorthingtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
People Ex Rel. New England Dressed Meat & Wool Co. v. RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
National Bank v. FinkTexas Supreme Court · 1893

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