Legal Opinion

Marx v. Scott

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 5, 1937PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By CARPENTER, J.

The error assigned in these cases is that the trial court sustained demuri'ers to the petitions. The form of the petition in each case is exactly the same. The issue in the first case will be disposed of. The other two cases will follow that disposition.

The petition is drawn under the gaming statutes, §§5966 to 5969, GC, and the plaintiff as “any person,” or an informer, prosecutes the claim for his own use under §5969, GC. The defendants are two corporations and thirteen individuals, two of whom are alleged to be the owners of or to have an interest in the real estate…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lannen v. WorlandOhio Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Salamon v. Taft Broadcasting Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Ohio Gambling Recovery, LLC v. Kalshi Inc., et al.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API