Hamilton Circuit Court, 1908

Brown & Ketcham Iron Co. v. L. P. Hazen & Co.

Brown & Ketcham Iron Co. v. L. P. Hazen & Co.
Hamilton Circuit Court · Decided January 4, 1908 · Oiffln, Smith, Swing
20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 490; 11 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 48; 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 148

Counsel

Cobb, Howard & Bailey, for plaintiff in error., Raymond Ratliff, for defendant in error

Brown & Ketcham Iron Co. v. L. P. Hazen & Co.

Opinion of the Court

SMITH, J.

Upon the authority of Ward v. Ward, 10 Circ. Dec. 656 (20 R. 136), we are of the opinion that the affidavit for attachment filed herein was void. This being so, did the giving of a bond by the defendant below to discharge the attachment have the effect of submitting the defendant to the jurisdiction of the court? We think not. See Saxton v. Plymire, 2 Circ. Dec. 118 (3 R. 209). The court therefore erred in overruling the motion of plaintiff in error to discharge the attachment, and said judgment is reversed.

Swing and Oiffln, JJ., concur.

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