Johns v. Johns
Ohio Supreme Court
This cause was reserved for decision here, in Hamilton county. It was an action of debt upon simple contract; the plea, nil debet. The point presented for decision arose on the ^proofs.
Read the full summary
This cause was reserved for decision here, in Hamilton county. It was an action of debt upon simple contract; the plea, nil debet. The point presented for decision arose on the ^proofs. Pre- [272. vious to the taking effect of the insolvent act of 1831, and subsequent to the period assigned for the making of the alleged contract, upon which the declaration was founded, the plaintiff had surrendered his property to the commissioner of insolvents, in conformity with the then existing law, and had been discharged from custody. At the trial, upon proof of these facts, the court ruled that the…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
A single question is presented for our consideration. It is this r *278Do the choses in action of an insolvent debtor, who made his assignment under the act for the relief of insolvent debtors of February, 1824, pass, and the legal interest in them vest in the commissioner of insolvents? If they do so pass the decision on the circuit was correct; if not, a new trial must be granted.
Section 2 of the act of 1824 provides, that “ no suit pending at the time of the assignment of such insolvent’s estate to said commissioner shall abate or be discontiued by reason of such assignment, but the same shall…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Lessee of Washington Sockman v. SockmanOhio Supreme Court · 1849