Legal Opinion

Janchar v. Cerkvenik

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided April 28, 1930No. 10700PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.

In determining this question it is well enough to keep in mind as bearing upon the contention that oral proof is incompetent, that the loss or destruction of the instrument of writing or defendants’ refusal to produce it, in no manner affects the validity or force and effect of the instrument of writing, for whose existence the secondary proof was offered and rejected. This instrument of writing could only be invalidated by mutual consent, by cancellation, or the final discharge of its terms. Therefore it must be admitted that the loss of the instrument or the refusal to produce it, in no way…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Shields v. SterratSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Anchorage-Hynning & Co., a District of Columbia Limited Partnership v. Thomas G. MoringielloCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
  2. Anchorage-Hynning & Co., a District of Columbia Limited Partnership v. Thomas G. MoringielloCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API