Ohio Court of Appeals, 1945

Snouffer v. Bartlett

Snouffer v. Bartlett
Ohio Court of Appeals · Decided December 7, 1945 · Hornbeck, Miller, Wiseman
45 Ohio Law. Abs. 108

Snouffer v. Bartlett

090onmotiontostrike

ON MOTION TO STRIKE FROM THE FILES

No. 3857.

By THE COURT:

Submitted on motion to strike from the files and expunge from the record the entry filed herein on the 7th day of January, 1946 for the reason that the entry was not submitted to opposing counsel or approved by him, and also that no notice was served on opposing counsel, and for the further reason that said entry was not signed by at least two Judges of this Court.

The motion is sustained and said entry is ordered stricken from the files and expunged from the record.

HORNBECK, P. J., WISEMAN and MILLER, J. J., concur.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By THE COURT:

Submitted on motion of plaintiff-appellant for an order releasing the appeal bond given herein and discharging the principal and surety thereon for the reason that the said appeal bond was given to p.erfect an appeal on questions of law and fact, which appeal was ordered dismissed as it was not a law and fact case, but the appeal was allowed to stand on *109questions of law. The plaintiff has filed no brief and cited no authorities to support his contention. Among the purposes enumerated for the giving of a supersedeas bond as stated in ยง13223-14 GC.

Decided January 31, 1946.

โ€œ* * * The party appealing shall abide and perform the order and judgment of the appellate court and pay all money,, costs and damages which may be required of or awarded against him upon the final determination of said appeal * *

Since the appeal is still pending the costs have not been determined, nor paid and since the bond was given for this purpose as well as other reasons, the bond cannot be released at this time. The motion is accordingly overruled.

HORNBECK, P. J., WISEMAN and MILLER, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.