Biggerstaff v. Loveland
Ohio Supreme Court
The complainants in this case are the heirs at law of Calvin Luzen, late of Sandusky county, deceased, and the bill is filed to redeem certain land under a mortgage incumbrance, and which has also been sold for taxes. As the facts of the case are stated m the opinion of the court, ib is unnecessary to introduce them here.
1Opinion of the CourtHitchcock, J.
The facts of this case, so far as it is necessary to state the same for the purpose of understanding the points decided, are as follows : On December 4, 1824, Calvin Luzen, father of the complainants, being indebted to one Sheldon Chapin, of Buffalo, in the State of New York, in the sum of eighty dollars, to secure payment, executed to Chapin a mortgage upon lot No. 88, in the town of Lower Sandusky. Before payment was made, Calvin Luzen died, leaving the complainants his heirs at law, and the defendant, Clarinda Luzen, his widow, and *Samuel Treat was appointed his administrator. On November…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Doe ex dem. Heighway v. PendletonOhio Supreme Court · 1846
- Doe ex dem. Heighway v. PendletonOhio Supreme Court · 1846