Legal Opinion

Minerva Sav & Tr Co. v. Lyder

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided July 1, 1930No. 1051PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLemert, J.

We believe that this whole case rests upon the construction to be given the collateral agreement of March 29th, 1928. We further believe that the language used in pledging this stock should be interpreted in its ordinary legal meaning and that it is to be strictly construed.

“The general rules of construction apply in construing a contract of pledge, in accordance with which the rights and liabilities of the parties are, if possible, to be construed and enforced according to the intention of the parties as determined from the terms of the contract of pledge and the subject matter, and the…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Figgers v. Dayton Power & Light Employees Federal Credit Union (In Re Figgers)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1990
  2. Madlener v. GreathouseOhio Court of Appeals · 1939
  3. Keifer, Exr. v. Kissell, Admx.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1947
  4. Cullen v. Government Savings & Loan Co.Hamilton County Municipal Court · 1973
  5. Seiberling Rubber Co. v. EvattUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API