Lessee of Curtis v. Norton
Ohio Supreme Court
This cause came before Judges Hitchcock and Burnet, at the September term, 1824, in Knox county. The lessor of the plaintiff claimed title under a sheriff’s deed, made on a sale of the premises in question, by virtue of judgments and executions against Samuel H. Smith.
Read the full summary
This cause came before Judges Hitchcock and Burnet, at the September term, 1824, in Knox county. The lessor of the plaintiff claimed title under a sheriff’s deed, made on a sale of the premises in question, by virtue of judgments and executions against Samuel H. Smith. In order to lay a foundation for offering his deed in evidence, he produced the record of a judgment for $1,446.50 against S. H. Smith, in favor of James Smith, entered on the 14th September, 1822; also, the record of a judgment for $450.17, against the same defendant, in favor of William Stansbury, entered at the same time. He…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The question now presented is a new one. The provision on which the objection is taken, was first introduced into our code by the act of 1822, and we are now, for the first time, called on to give it a construction. *The words of the proviso are these: “ That if the court, to which any writ of execution shall be returned by the officer, for the satisfaction of which any lands and tenements may have been sold, shall, after having carefully examined the proceedings of such officer, be satisfied, that the sale has, in all respects, been made in conformity to the provisions of this…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Baxter v. O'LearySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1897