Legal Opinion

Shilling v. Octavio

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1964No. Nos. 38229 and 38270Published

1Opinion of the CourtTaft, C. J.

The question to be decided may be stated as follows:

Where a plaintiff in an action for money only fails to state in the praecipe for summons “the amount for which judgment is asked” and where the summons issued pursuant to that praecipe does not have endorsed on it “the amount * * * for which, with interest, judgment will be taken if the defendant fails to answer,” is that summons, if otherwise in proper form and if properly served upon the defendant, sufficient to give the court jurisdiction over the person of the defendant?

Defendants contend that such a summons is a nullity.

Whether such a…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Tootle, Hanna & Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
  2. Kagay v. Trustees of SchoolsIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Lawton v. NicholasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1903
  4. Campbell v. ChaffeeSupreme Court of Florida · 1856
  5. Gigoux v. GriffithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1921

6 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