Legal Opinion
D. H. Overmyer Co., Inc. of Ohio v. Frick Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 24, 1972No. 69-5PublishedCited by 547 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Blackmun
This case presents the issue of the constitutionality, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, of the cognovit note authorized by Ohio Rev. Code § 2323.13.1
*176The cognovit is the ancient legal device by which the debtor consents in advance to the holder’s obtaining a judgment without notice or hearing, and possibly even with the appearance, on the debtor’s behalf, of an attorney designated by the holder.2 It was known at least as far back as Blackstone’s time. 3 W. Blackstone, Commentaries *397.3 In a case applying Ohio law, it was *177said that the purpose of the cognovit is “to…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by547 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Lee Caley v. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005
- in the Interest of K.M.L., a ChildTexas Supreme Court · 2014
- Erie Telecommunications, Inc. v. City of Erie, PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
542 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.