Legal Opinion

Franklin Bond & Investment Co. v. Long

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided November 27, 1923PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAllread, J.

The original action was in replevin. The plaintiff below, who is plaintiff in error here, claims under a chattel mortgage duly filed for record. The defendant claims as purchaser from the mortgagor. The property involved in the replevin is an Oakland automobile, coupe model. The mortgagor is a dealer in automobiles, and sold the automobile involved in this contro*236versy in the ordinary course of business for full value.

The answer consists of several defenses, the first of which is a general denial. The second and third defenses were taken from the jury, and therefore need not be stated. The…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Boice v. Finance & Guaranty Corp.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1920
  2. Freeman v. RawsonOhio Supreme Court · 1855
  3. National City Bank v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  4. Border Nat. Bank v. CouplandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1917
  5. In re HallbauerDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1920

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jimmy Franklin Connor v. Paul Helo William Peters John Allen and Robert BarberCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
  2. Cuyahoga Baking Co. v. TomasouskasOhio Court of Appeals · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API