text:
    No. 10133.
    The Plano Manufacturing Co. v. Renner & Elder.
    Decided March 26, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. W. B. Page and Mr. W. J. Ford, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Merwine & Schumacher, for defendant in error.
    Judgment reversed. Grounds stated in journal entry.
   It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed, for error in affirming the judgment of the court of common pleas of said Franklin county. And this court proceeding to render the judgment said circuit court should have rendered, it is ordered that the judgment of the said court of common pleas be, and the same hereby is, reversed, and the verdict set aside for error in overruling the motion for a new trial on the ground that the court erred, in refusing to charge the jury as requested by the defendant in its first and third special requests, and that this cause is remanded to said court for further proceedings according to law.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 10149.
    Donohue v. Hynicka, Treasurer.
    Decided March 26, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. E. R. Donohue, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Wm. F. Chambers and Messrs. Ireton, Collins, Schoenle & Poor, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers, Spear an,d Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9722.
    The Pennsylvania Company v. Hill.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      Messrs. Carey & Mullins and Mr. A. H. Mitchell, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Tollman & Armstrong, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas- affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ. concur.


text:
    No. 9750.
    Haines et al. v. Hosler.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock- county.

      Mr. A. G. Fuller, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. George F. Pendleton, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9751.
    Haines et al. v. Barr.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Mr. A. G. Fidler, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. George F. Pendleton, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9763.
    Sullivan v. The Columbus Citizens Telephone Co.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. Barton Griffith and Mr. Frank S. Walker, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Frank A. Davis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.'


text:
    No. 9764.
    Burns v. The Columbus Citizens Telephone Co.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. Barton Griffith and Mr. Frank S. Walker, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Frank A. Davis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10154.
    The American Savings Bank v. Heinsen.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Rhoades & Rhoades, for plaintiff in error. Mr. M. D. Merrick and Mr. J. C. Jones, for defendant in error.
    Judgment reversed and cause remanded to court of common pleas for further proceedings. Grounds stated in journal entry. .
   It is ordered and adjudged by this court that 'the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed, and this court proceeding to render the judgment which said circuit court should have rendered, it is considered, and adjudged that the judgment of the said court of common pleas be, and the same hereby is, reversed, because the reply in said cause was a departure from the petition, and for error in refusing to give the fifth request of said plaintiff in error.'

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10250..
    Swing, Trustee, v. The Richardson Paper Co.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county. •

      Mr. Smith W. Bennett and Mr. Patterson A. Reece, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Joseph C. Smith, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and final judgment for plaintiff in error.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10276.
    Richards, Receiver, v. Levy.
    Decided March 29, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. Smith W. Bennett and Mr. Patterson A. Reece, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Howard Douglass and Mr. G. W. Harding, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

. Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9771.
    Taplin, Rice & Co. v. Webster et al.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Summit county.

      Mr. W. H. Upson and Messrs. Stuart & Stuart, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9777.
    The Edward H. Everett Co. v. The German-American Insurance Co.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Licking county. Messrs.. Hunter & Hunter, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. W. Mooney and Messrs. Kibler & Kibler, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9838.
    The Roderick Lean Manufacturing Co. v. Hammacher et al.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Messrs. Jenner & Weldon, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Kerr & La Dow, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9856.
    Kesting v. The East Side Bank Co.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Holbrook & Monsarrat and Messrs. Blandin, Rice & Ginn, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Hills & Van Derveer and Messrs. Shunk &■ Thompson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9859.
    Stanton et al. v. The Home Mutual Building & Loan Co.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    ■ Error to. Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      Mr. O. W. Newman and Messrs. Holcomb & Millar, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. P. Purdum and Mr. N. J. Dever, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9860.
    The Cady-Ivison Shoe Co. v. Chicowicz.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Goff, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Henry DuLaurance, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Dávis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9861.
    Bowler et al. v. The City Banking Co. of Findlay.
    Decided April 9, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county,

      Messrs. Phelps & David, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. J. A. & E. V. Bope, for defendant in' error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, J.J, concur.


text:
    No. 9809.
    Searl v. Voorheis et al.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      Mr. Harry W. Miller and Mr. Noah J. Dever, for plaintiff in error. Mr. T. C. Anderson, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9864.
    The Stowe-Fuller Co. v. Dominick.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. George S. Kain' and Messrs. Henry & Couse, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Kerruish & Kerruish, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9869.
    Alworth v. Cline.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Messrs. Phelps & David for plaintiff in error. Messrs. McConica & Dwiggins and Messrs. Cole, Williams & Cole, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9898.
    The Royal Brush & Broom Co. v. Bresewske, an Infant, by, etc.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. King & Tracy, for plaintiff in error.. Mr. Ashton H. Coldham, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10134.
    Hackett, a Taxpayer, v. The City of Cincinnati et al.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Cobb, Howard & Bailey, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Jesse Lowman, city solicitor; Mr. J. W. Warrington, Mr. Miller Outcalt and Mr. Smith Hickenlooper, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J,, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10296.
    The State, ex rel. Carroll, v. Taft et al., Trustees.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. J. B. Frenkel and Mr. R. De V. Carroll, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Jesse Lowman; Mr. T. M. Hinkle and Mr. J. R. Schindel, city solicitors, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

SitauckJ C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10391.
    Dirlam v. McBride.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Rich-land county.

      Mr. Darius Dirlam, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Cummings, McBride & Wolfe, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10601.
    The City of Cleveland et al. v. The City of Cleveland, by etc.
    Decided April 16, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey and Mr. E. K. Wilcox, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. N. D. Baker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed for reasons given in the opinion of the judge of the court of common pleas.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9715.
    Carlet (Marquis de la Roziere) et al. v. Neville et al., Exrs. and Trustees.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. M. B. & H. H.

      Johnson, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Olds & Willet; Mr. G. S. Cole and Mr. E. J. Blandin, for defendants in error.
    Judgment modifiedShauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9747.
    The Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Co. v. The Toledo Railway & Terminal Co.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. 'C. A. Seiders and Messrs. Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Hamilton & Kirby; Messrs. Brown, Geddes, Schmettau & Williams and Messrs. King & Tracy, for defendant in error.
   On rehearing. Judgment reversed and cause remanded to the circuit court with direction to obey the mandate of May, 1905, by hearing and determining the application' for a separation of crossings.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9813.
    United States Express Co. et al. v. Blakely.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Messrs. Cable & Parmenter; Mr. J. B. Cockrum; Messrs Richie & Richie and Mr. W. H. Leete, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Ridenour & Half hill and Messrs. Welty & Downing, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9815.
    Pfeiffer v. The Village of New Madison.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Mr. G. W. Mannix and Messrs. Robeson & Yount, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. B. Wheeler; Mr. J. A. White and Mr. Boyd Doty, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9844.
    Gallaher, Sheriff, v. Forgy et al.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Warren county.

      Mr. Prank Brandon; Mr. G. A..Burr and Mr. H: W. Ivins, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Patrick Gaynor, for defendants in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9870.
    Kelso v. McVey et al.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Portage county.

      Mr. C. H. Curtiss, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Arrel, McVey, Rowland & Harrington, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear' and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10031.
    Wright, Auditor, v. The State, ex rel. Smith, Trustee.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Stage & Cannon, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Smith, Taft & Arter, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10104.
    Haskell v. Brodhead.
    Decided April 23, 1907;
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. John P. Bailey and Messrs. Daugherty & Todd, for plaintiff in error. Mr. T. E. Powell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10108.
    The Mahoning Valley Railway Co. v. Shunk, Admr.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Messrs. Arrel, Wilson, Rozvland & Harrington, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. R. Johnson and Mr. E. N. Brown, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10152.
    The City of Portsmouth v. Milstead.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Cir-. cuit Court of Scioto county.

      Mr. Wade H: Ellis; Mr. S. W. Bennett and Mr. G. M. Osborn, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Henry Bannon, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10153.
    The City of Portsmouth v. Baucus.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      Mr. W. H. Ellis; Mr. S. W. Bennett and Mr. G. M. Osborn, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Henry Bannon, for defendant in error.

   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10258.
    The Village of Lowellville v. Meehan.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      Mr. W. T. Gibson; Mr. L. H. E. Lowry and Mr. S. D. L. Jackson, for plaintiff in error. Mr. M. C. McNab and Mr. J. P. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9847.
    The Marting Iron & Steel Co. v. Justice.
    Decided April 23, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lawrence county.

      Mr. C. D. Robertson and Mr. John Hamilton, for plaintiff in error. Mr. L. R. Andrews and Mr. T. N. Ross, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9878.
    Lovejoy v. Kelso.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga o.iunty.

      Messrs. Herrick & Hopkins, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Klein & Harris and Mr. Fred. Desberg, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9879.
    Deeds, Admr., v. Croft.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit -Court of Hancock county.

      Messrs. Franks & Franks and Messrs. McConica & Dwiggins, for plaintiff in error. Mr. G. F. Pendleton, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price- and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10110.
    The Hocking Valley Railway Co. v. Schmidt.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. C. O. Hunter, for plaintiff in error. Mr. T. E. Powell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of 'circuit and common pleas courts reversed on ground that testimony of plaintiff below shows contributory negligence as matter of law.

Shauck, C. J., Price, .Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10143.
    The Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Baron et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Messrs. Paxton & Warrington, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Hoffman, Bode & LeBlond and Messrs. O’Hara & Jordan, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10171.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Davis and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. C. J. Pretzman and DeWitt & Hubbard, for defendants - in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10172.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Park and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, FI err on & lames,- for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed-.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10173.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Sheldon and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & lames, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and' Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10174.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Burr, Exrx., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. .Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C.

      Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & West-fall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. I. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10175.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Converse and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. FI err on, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

' Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10176.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Watson and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stezvart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10177.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Sinks, Attorney, and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and ■ Messrs. Addison, Sinks. & Babcock,
      ' for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis., JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10178.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Hoover, Exrx., and The Columbus, San-dusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & West-fall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10179.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Park and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10180.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Kelton and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10181.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Miller and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs.. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10182.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Watson, Exr., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & West-fall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10183.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Comly et al., Exrs., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & West-fall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Barton Griffith; Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davís., JJ.,‘ concur.


text:
    No. 10184.
    Marriott and The A. E. Kinsey Co. v. Hoover, Exrx., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart;.Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messfs. Albery & West-fall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shaucík, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10185.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Stewart and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Pozvell; Messrs. Albery <?• Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs.

      Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J.5i Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10186.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Hutchinson et al., Exrs., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. De Witt & Hubbard, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10187.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Hoover, Exrx., and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed/

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10188.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. Miller and The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. B. Powell; Messrs. Albery & Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10189.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Watson, Exr., et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. C. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10190.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Stewart et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10191.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Kelton et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.

   Judgmérit affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10192.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Park et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10193.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Davis et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. J. Pretzman and Messrs. DeWitt & Hubbard, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10194.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Watson et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin, county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters’, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10195.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Park et al.
    Decided. April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit ■ Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10196.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Converse et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error .to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stezvart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. I. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keat■ing & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10197.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Sheldon et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stezvart;Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. ' Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., .Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10198.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Burr, Exrx., et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Booth, Keating & Peters, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10199.
    The Dayton Manufacturing Co. v. Hoover, Exrx., et al.
    Decided April 30,, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stewart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector and Messrs. Albery & Westfall, for plaintiff in error. 'Mr. J. F. Rogers and Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock, for defendants, in error.
   Judgaffirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10355.
    Marriott and The E. A. Kinsey Co. v. The Columbus, Sandusky & Hocking Railroad Co. et al.
    Decided April 30, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Stezvart & Stewart; Mr. F. C. Rector; Mr. T. E. Powell; Messrs. Albery & - Westfall and Messrs. Herron, Gatch, Herron & James, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock; Mr. J. F. Rogers; Messrs. Safer, Seymour & Safer; Mr. W. 0. Henderson and Mr. J. T. Holmes, Jr., for defendants in error.-
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9929.
    Gorsuch v. The Cleveland Terminal & Valley Railroad Co. et al.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Goulder, Holding & Mas-ten, for. plaintiff in error. Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Goff and Messrs. Smith, Taft &■ Arter, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9934.
    McKeag v. Shober.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Mr. B. M. ClenDening, for .plaintiff in error. Messrs. Robertson & Buchwalter, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10200.
    The Solar Refining Co. v. Copus.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Messrs. Wheeler & Bentley and Mr. J. 0. Troup, for plaintiff in error: Messrs. Baldtvin & Harrington, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10221.
    The Acme Paving Co. v. The CoLumbus & Hocking Coal & Iron Co.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. G. J. Marriott and Mr. C. E. Blue, for plaintiff'in error. Messrs. Outhwaite, Linn & Thurman and.ikfr. D. N. Postlewaite, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10272.
    The Tom Corwin Coal Co. v. Parker.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Messrs. McGillivray & Armstrong, for plaintiff in error. Mr. E. C. Powell, for defendant in error.
   Judgments of the circuit and common pleas courts reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error on authority of Coal & Mining Co. v. Admr. of Clay, 51 Ohio St., 542; Krause et al. v. Morgan, 53 Ohio St., 26, and Coal Co. v. Estievenard, 53 Ohio St., 43.

Shauck, C. J., Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10300.
    The Empire Coal Mining Co. v. George.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      Mr. A. H. Mitchell; Mr. S. M. Douglass and Mr. W. C. Grubbs, for plaintiff in error. Mr. E. E. Clevenger and Messrs. Tollman & Spriggs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Summers and-Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10410.
    Starkey v. The State of Ohio.
    Decided May 7, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Meigs county.

      Mr. M. ■ S. Webster; Mr. C. E. Peoples and Mr. A. J. Greene, for plaintiff in error. Mr. A. P. Miller, prosecuting attorney; Mr. O. L. Bradbury and Mr. F. C. Russell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9676.
    Scott v. The Toledo Real Estate & Investment Co. et al.
    Decided May 14, 1907.

      Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county,

      Mr. C. W. Everett, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Seney, Johnson &' Seney, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. ]., Price and Crew, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9695.
    Breidenstein v. The State, ex rel. Kerr.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Jefferson county.

      Messrs. Billingsley, Clark & DeFord, and Mr. J. G. Moore, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. C. Brown and Mr. J. A. Mansfield, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price and Summers, JJ., concur. Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 9710.
    Kerr v. The Grafton Savings Bank Co. et al.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Lorain county.

      Mr. B. A. Gage; Mr. L. J. Wood; Mr. Walter Lister and Mr. Clayton Chapman, for. plaintiff in error. Messrs. Wood & Gage; Messrs. Higley & Maurer; Messrs. Lister & Chapman; Mr. D. J. Dye; Mr. J. G. Hill; Messrs. Johnston & Leonard and Mr. F. M. Stevens, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9711.
    Hale v. The Grafton Savings Bank Co. et al.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lorain county.

      Mr. B. A. Gage; Mr. L. J. Wood; Mr. Walter Lister and Mr. Clayton Chapman, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Wood & Gage; Messrs'. Higley & Maurer;

      Messrs. Lister & Chapman; Mr. D. J. Nye; Mr.' J. G. Hill; Messrs. Johnston & Leonard and Mr. F. M. Stevens, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9712.
    Fuller v. The Grafton Savings Bank Co. et al.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lorain county.
    Mr. B. A. Gage; Mr. L. J. Wood; Mr. Walter Lister and Mr. Clayton Chapman, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Wood & Gage; Messrs. Higley & Maurer; Messrs. Lister & Chapman; Mr. D. J. Nye'; Mr. J. G. Hill; Messrs. Johnston & Leonard and Mr. F. M. Stevens, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9817.
    Swander v. Berger.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Mr. N. W. Miller and Mr. Alexander Kiskadden, for plaintiff in error. Mr. H. P. Black and Mr. C. E. Derr, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10098.
    In re The Final Settlement Account of W. H. Roasberry, Admr.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Rich-land county.

      Mr. W. S. Kerr; Mr. Samuel Marriott and Mr. W. J. Bissman, for petitioners in error. Mr. Washington Bozvie, Jr.; Messrs. Laser, Houston & Marquis and Messrs. Jones &

      James, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed upon the ground that though cause was not appealable to circuit court, the error in overruling motion to dismiss appeal was waived by the subsequent conduct of the parties.

Shauck, C. J., Crew , and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10201.
    Manton et al. v. Boos.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. J. P. Mantón, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. F. Kumler; and Mr. J. F. Kumler, Jr., for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10222.
    Baker et al. v. The Village of Arcanum.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Messrs. Robeson & Yount and Messrs. Anderson, Bowman & Anderson, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Meeker & Gaskill, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10293.
    Knight v. Harding, Trustee, et al.
    Decided May 14, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. J. R. Sayler and Mr. Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., for plaintiff in error. Mr. William Worthington and Mr. S. B. Plammel, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9785.
    The Standard Oil Co v. Strategier et al.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

      'Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Goff and Messrs. Shepherd & Shaffer, for plaintiff in error. Mr. M. 0. Burns and Messrs. Binkley & Binkley, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9799.
    The Columbus Natural Gas Co. v. A. H. Heisey & Co., a Partnership.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Licking county.

      Mr. G. C. Daugherty; Mr. Fenwick Ewing; Mr. J. A. Hindman and Messrs. Kibler & Montgomery, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Carl Norpell and Messrs. Jones & Jones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9801.
    In re Application of B. M. ClenDening for Writ of Habeas Corpus. ClenDening v. Jones, Sheriff.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Mr. 0. J. Cosgrave, for petitioner in error. Messrs. Robertson & Buchwalter, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9892.
    Mitchell v. The State of Ohio.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Mr. H. C. Armstrong, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. F. Howard and Mr. W. B.

      Wheeler, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10025.
    Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Elkins, Admx.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lawrence county.

      Messrs. Bannon & Bannon and Mr. A. R. Johnson, for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. L. Anderson and Mr. L. R. Andrews, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10202.
    The United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Turner et al., Partners.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Erie county.

      Mr. G. E. Reiter, - for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. F. McCrystal, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10234.
    The Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Magruder et al.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Maxwell & Ramsey, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Judson JJarmon; Messrs. Harper & Allen and Messrs. Richards & Richards, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10256.
    Watterson v. Halliday, Auditor, et al.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. L. G. Byrne and Mr. J. M. Howard, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Dyer, Williams & Stouffer and Mr. K. T. Webber, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sbaucic, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Dayis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10554.
    Young v. The State of Ohio.
    Decided May 21, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      'Mr. T. J. Keating and Mr. I. H. Dyer, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Williams, Taylor & Pretzman and Mr. G. G. Battle-, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9846.
    Whiteman et al., Admrs., v. Dunn et al., Exrs.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Brown county.

      Mr. G. Bambach and Mr. R. L. Fite, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. E. B. Parker; Mr. J. R. Moore and Messrs. Tarbell & Tarbell, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summer and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9916.
    The Marion Cemetery Assn. v. Wiltsie et al.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Marion county.

      Messrs. Crissinger & Guthery, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. C. Fisher, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9935.
    Jenkins, Admr., v. Jenkins.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning county,
    ikfr. E. H. Moore and Mr. H. W. Craver, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Norris, Jackson & Rose, for defendant in error.
    Judgment of circuit court reversed .and judgment of common pleas modified.
   It is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be, and the same hereby is, reversed and this court proceeding to render the judgment which said circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of said court of common pleas be, and it hereby is, modified as follows: By adding to the entry thereto the following: but no execution shall issue upon this judgment until there is filed in the cause a bond by said plaintiff in the sum of said judgment with sureties to the approval of the clerk of this court and conditioned that'said plaintiff will fully reimburse and indemnify said defendant if any action should be brought upon said note and recovery had by one not a party to this suit.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9954.
    Evans v. Tussing.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Licking county.

      Mr. S. L. James, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Donaldson &■ Tussing, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis,. JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10232.
    The Baltimore & Ohio & Chicago Railroad Co. et al. v. Maxwell.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Defiance county.

      Mr. B. B. Kingsbury and Messrs. Calhoun, Lyford & Sheean, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. W. D. Hill and Mr. J. H. Hockman, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10235.
    Buzzard, Admr., v. The Toledo & Ohio Central Railway Co.
    Decided May 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. C. A. Thatcher, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Doyle, Lewis & Schaufelberger, for' defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9834.
    The City of Cleveland et al. v. Raynolds, a Taxpayer.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. N.- D. Baker, city solicitor, and Messrs. Garñeld, Howe & Westenhaver, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. C. W. Collister and Mr. S. H. Tolies, for defendant.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9852.
    The German Fire Insurance Co. v. Hoffman et al., Partners.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Wajme county.

      Messrs. Calhoun & Guenther, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Smyser, Weygant & Weiser, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, .Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9853.
    The Anchor Fire Insurance Co. v. Hoffman et al., Partners.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Messrs. Calhoun & Guenther, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Smyser, Weygant & Weiser, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and .Davis, JJ., concur. ' .


text:
    No. 9854.
    The Spring Garden Insurance Co. v. Hoffman et al., Partners.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Messrs. Calhoun & Guenther, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Smyser, Weygant■ & Weiser, for defendants in error.

   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9874.
    The Interurban Railway & Terminal Co. v. Houser.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to' Circuit Court of Clermont county.

      Mr. F. F. Dinsmore and Messrs. Nichols & Nichols, for plaintiff in error. C. C. Kearns and Messrs. Griffith & Nichols, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ.,- concur.


text:
    No. 9956.
    Shorb, Admr., v. The Beaver Dam Coal Co.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      Messrs. Bailey

      & Douthitt, for plaintiff in error. Mr. L. B. Bacon and Mr. R.'T. Scott, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9986.
    The Chicago & Erie Railroad Co. v. The Lima Telephone & Telegraph Co.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Mr. W. 0. Johnson and Messrs.Ridenour & Halfhill, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Cable & Parmenter, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed. Petition failed to

show appreciable injury.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9992.
    Karpinski, Admr., v. The Lake Erie Iron Co.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Mr. J. H. P indr as and Messrs. Herrick & Hopkins, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Golf, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, the judgment of reversal in the circuit court involving the weight of the evidence.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew. Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10236.
    Simler, Admx., v. The Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Co.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. C. A. Thatcher, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. A. Seiders, for defendant in error'.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10411.
    The Village of London v. Jones et al.
    Decided June 4, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Madison county.

      Mr. B. P. Jones and Messrs. McCloud & Converse, ' for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Murray & Emery, for defendants in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed .and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9840.
    Moulton, Admr., v. Finney et al.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      Messrs. Bannon & Bannon; Messrs. Evans & Moulton and Mr. N. J. Dever, for plaintiff in error. Mr. S. W. Bennett; Mr. F. B. Finney; Mr. F. F. Dinsmore and Mr. O. W. Newman, for defendants in error.
    Judgment modified. Grounds stated in journal entry.
   This court is of the opinion that there is error in the judgment of the circuit court in this, to-wit: in the eleventh and twelfth findings of fact and in the judgment dismissing the petition of plaintiffs at their costs.

The court is of further opinion that from the undisputed evidence it does appear that neither the said John K. Duke nor Lola C. Duke was, at the time of said transaction, capable of entering into said agreement for the transfer of said life insurance, policies, but that said contract was in legal effect procured by duress, was speculative in its nature, and, whatever may have been the motive prompting the making of it by defendants, was not a bona ñde sale and'transfer in the legal sense, but resulted in the taking of an inequitable advantage of the circumstances and condition of the said John K. Duke and Lola Duke; and that the justice and equity of the case upon the facts requires that the judgment dismissing the petition be reversed and the same is hereby reversed. And proceeding to render the judgment which the circuit court should have rendered, the defendants are awarded from the fund paid into court by the several insurance companies the amounts paid by said defendants by force of said- attempted contract respecting the transfers of said policies, with interest to the date of this decision, June 11, 1907. And it appearing that upon the rendition of the judgment by the circuit court on the 13th day of November, 1905, the whole of said fund with accrued interest to November ' 23, 1905, amounting at that date to $11,568.22, was paid over to the defendants, Frank B. Finney and J. Leigh Watkins, which with interest at four per cent, to June 11, 1907, amounts to $12,285.73; and leaving after deducting the said sum awarded to defendants as aforesaid and the costs of these proceedings in the circuit court and the court of common pleas, taxed at $178.00, which the defendants, Frank B. Finney and J. Leigh Watkins, are ordered to pay from said fund the sum of $7,609.15, which the defendants are ordered to pay to the plaintiffs.

It is therefore considered by this court that the plaintiffs do recover from defendants, Frank B. Finney and J. Leigh Watkins, the said sum of $7,609.15, herein found due, the same to bear interest at four per cent, from and after June 11, 1907.

This court does not pass upon the legal question argued, whether or not such assignment ■ of insurance policies might under any circumstances be sustained.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9851.
    Board of County Commissioners et al. v. Amsbaugh.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mr. Wade H. Ellis, attorney-general; Messrs. Douglass & Workman and Mr. C. H. Huston, prosecuting attorney, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Reed & Beachj for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9896.
    The Hocking Valley Railway Co. v. Decker, Admx.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Error to Circuit' Court of Marion county.

      Mr. J. F. McNeal and Mr. C. O. Hunter, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Crissinger & Guthery, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Shauck, C. J., Price,. Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur. Davis, J., did not participate.


text:
    No. 10083.
    Berry v. State of Ohio.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Marion county.

      Mr. H. C. Armstrong, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. F. Orr, prosecuting attorney, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J,, Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10247.
    State of Ohio v. Ehlers.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Exceptions to Court of Common Pleas of Erie county,

      Mr. R. H. Williams, prosecuting attorney, for plaintiff in error. Mr. E. B. King, for defendant in error.
   Exceptions overruled.

Si-iauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10273.
    Dugan v. Haines et al.
    Decided June 11, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Guernsey county.

      -Mr. J. B. Ferguson, for plaintiff in error. Mr. R. T. Scott, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, -Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9895.
    Vanniman v. Linton.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Messrs. Snodgrass & Schnebly, for plaintiff in error. Mr. H. L. Smith, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spiauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ'., concur.


text:
    No. 9899.
    The City of Akron v. Barry.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Summit county.

      Mr. C. F. Beery and Mr. S. D. Kenfield, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Voris, Vaughan & Vaughan, for defendant in error.

   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed on authority of City of Norwalk v. Tuttle, 73 Ohio St., 242.

Spiauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9900.
    The F. P. Rusher Lumber Co. v. Troxel et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Messrs. Cable & Parmenter, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Sprague & Lippincott and Mr. Edwin Blank, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9915.
    Grimm v. The Henry Leopold Furniture Co.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.
    Mr. R. H. Lee, for plaintiff in error. Mr. L. I. Litsler and Mr. C. S. Bentley, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., -concur.


text:
    No. 9923.
    Thomas et al v. Bowler et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock'county.

      Messrs. McConica & Dwiggins; Mr. Edward Beverstock'; Mr. W. W. Campbell and Messrs. Ross & Kinder, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Phelps & David, for defendants in error.
   Judgment áffirmed.

Price, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.'


text:
    No. 9926.
    Sims, Treas., et al., v. Murphy.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Messrs. Webber, McCoy, King & Game, prosecuting attorneys, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. Ulric Sloane, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

.Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9925.
    Murphy v. Sims, Treas., et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. Ulric Sloane, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Webber, McCoy, King & Game, prosecuting attorneys, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9930.
    Holzbach v. The Malone Stone Co.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Trumbull county.

      Messrs. Smiley & Weiss, for' plaintiff in error. Mr. Joseph Smith, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9933.
    McKinley v. McKinley.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Fell & School; Mr. A., F. Connolly .and Messrs. Kohn & Northup, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Parks Hone and Mr. W. H. A. Read, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9959.
    The Baltimore & Ohio Railway Co. v. Schultz, a Minor, etc.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Goff, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Herman Preusser, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed

and that of 'the common pleas affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10277.
    The New England Lodge No. 4, Free and Accepted Masons et al. v. Weaver, Trustee, et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. T. J, Duncan and Mr. E. E. Corwin, for plaintiff in error. Mr. O. W. Aldrich and Messrs. Andrews, Harlan & Andrews, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10288.
    French, Admr., v. The Ann Arbor Railroad Co. et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county!

      Mr. C. A. Thatcher, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. G. Cunningham and Messrs. Smith & Beckwith, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10295.
    Jones v. The Plano Manufacturing Co.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. E. M. Baldridge and Mr. F. V. Owen, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. B. Page and Mr. W. J. Ford, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Sitauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Spear and Davis, - JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10562.
    Clark, Treas., v. Marquand et al.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Coshocton county.

      Messrs. Voorhees & Voorhees; Messrs. Pomerene & Pomerene, and Mr. James Glenn, for plaintiff in error. Mr. C. B. Hunt and Mr. John J. Adams, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10584.
    The Bloomfield Mining Co. v. Barry.
    Decided June 18, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mr. S. C. Kingman and Mr. A. E. Jacobs, for plaintiff in error. Mr. A. E. Barry, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9876.
    Keysor v. Yost, Treas., et al.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Mr. C. A. Thatcher and Mr. Aaron Slagle, for plain tiff in error. Mr. C. A.. Thatcher; Messrs. Seney & Johnson and Mr. Ctirtis T. Johnson, for defendants in error.

   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9881.
    Tuttle v. Williams et al., Trustees, et al.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Geauga county.

      Messrs. White, Johnson', McCaslin & Cannon, for plaintiff in error. Mr. A. B. Thompson; Mr. W. G. King;' Mr. C. B. Newton and Mr. H: J. Caldzvell, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9885.
    Diefenderfer et al. v. Heilman, Admr., et al.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Mahoning- county.

      Messrs.

      Murray & Koonce, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. J. C. Wilson and M'r. M. C. McNab, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9928.
    Poor, Exr., v. Barr.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Hollister & Hollister; Mr. Thos. Hollister and Mr. B. P. Hollister, for plaintiff in error. Mr. F. E. Niederhelman, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Crew, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9976.
    Hearn et al. v. Moore.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Harrison county.

      Mr. D. Cunningham and Mr. D. A. Hollingsworth, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. R. H. Minteer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10281.
    McCartney v. Moon et al.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Clinton county.

      Messrs. Hayes & Swaim and Mr. J. C. Martin, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Thorpe & Miller, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10307.
    The Royal Coal & Mining Co. et al. v. Johnson.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Jefferson county.

      Mr.

      Henry Gregg; Mr. Dio Rogers and Mr. Ira Blackburn, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Mc-Clave & McClave, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10473.
    The T. F. McClure & Sons Co. v. J. G. Collopy & Co. et al.
    Decided June 25, 1907.
    • Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Mr. David Davis and Mr. P. P. Dinsmore, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. W. Symmes, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9922.
    The City of Niles v. Kirk.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Trumbull county.

      Mr. Joseph Smith, city solicitor, and Mr. T. H. Gillmer, for. plaintiff in error. Messrs. Gillmer & Gillmer and Mr. G. P. Gillmer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9943.
    The Toledo & Indiana Railway Co. v. Russell.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to "Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Masters & Adams, for plaintiff in error. Mr. P. J. Ragan, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9944.
    The Logan Brick Manufacturing Co. v. The Federal Gas & Fuel Co.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Blocking county.

      Messrs. Dore & Dore, and Messrs. Bright & Bright, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Wright &■ Pettit, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Stt^mers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9948.
    Leffler v. Witten et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Mr. W. H. McMillen and Mr. James O. Troup, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Baldwin & Plarrington, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9949.
    Williard et al. v. Bedwell.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. G. J. Marriott, for plaintiffs in error. Messrs. Huggins, Huggins & Johnson, for defendant in error. .
   Judgment affirmed.

Si-iauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9950.
    Boyd et al. v. Hughes.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error .to Circuit Court of Marion county.

      Mr. W. P. Moloney, for plaintiffs in error, Messrs. Mouser & Quigley, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and. Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9951.
    Williams v. The Anchor Fire Insurance Co.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Mr. W. L.

      Miller and Mr. O. A. Dobbins, for plaintiff in . error. Mr. Charles Darlington and Mr. F. D.. Prentice, for defendant in error.
   Judgment af-. firmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9953.
    The State, ex rel. Kiser, v. Dodds, Auditor.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Messrs. Gowdy & Douglas, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Howard & Howard and Mr. L. L. Magruder, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9960.
    The Village of Quaker City v. Whitcraft.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Guernsey county.

      Mr. Fred. L. Rosemond and Mr. J. L. Douglas, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. O. Chappell; Mr. G. A. Colpitis and Messrs. Locke & Turnbaugh, for defendant, in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spiauck, G. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9961.
    Troup, Admx., v. The Peirce-Williams Co.
    Decided June 28, ’ 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Mr. 0. M. GottschaU, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. McMahon & McMahon, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis; JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9968.
    Marion v. Held.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Mr. R. S. Swepston, for plaintiff in error. Mr. W. M. Payne, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shaucic, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9969.
    Longabaugh, Admr., v. Ebersole et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit ' Court of Wyandotte county.

      Mr. Benjamin Aleck, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Carey & Carey and Messrs. Walton & Stecher, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spiauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9970.
    Wortkoetter, Admr., v. Hageman et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Putnam county.

      Mr. George Frits, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Bailey & Bailey and Mr. J. H. Straman, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9975.
    The Lake Shore Novelty Co. v. Quinlan.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Messrs. Mc-Conica & D wig gins, for plaintiff in error. Mr. E. T. Dunn and Mr. Chas. Blackford, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9989.-
    Barkus et al. v. The Woodsfield Building & Loan Co.
    Decided. June. 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Monroe county.

      Mr.

      E. L. Lynch, for plaintiffs in error; Messrs. Mats & Kremer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9990.
    Pond, Admr., v. Kunze et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mr. L. K. Powell and Messrs. Harlan & Wood, for plaintiff in error. Mr. T. B. Mateer and Mr. T. E. Duncan, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 9993.
    Bruer et al. v. Morgenthaler.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Renner & Renner and Mr. Eugene Heim, for plaintiffs in error. Mr. A. B. Benedict, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur. '


text:
    No. 9994.
    Standard Fashion Co. v. Neuhausel Brothers.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Messrs. Doyle, Lewis & Schaufelberger, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Fell & Schaal, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10128.
    White v. The C. & G. Cooper Co. et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Knox county.

      Mr. L. B. Houck;

      Mr. F. V. Owen and Mr.- Robert Ramsey, for plaintiff in error. Messrs. Wdight & Moore; Mr. R. R. Mclntire; Messrs. Kelley & Follett and Mr. J; W. Warrington, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ.; concur.


text:
    No. 10525.
    Markley v. The State, ex rel. Bambach.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Brown county.

      Mr. M. R. Patterson; Mr. C. W. Bishop; Mr. IT. H. Stevenson and Mr. Rufus L. Fite, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Hugh Nichols; Mr. Frank Davis; Mr. J. R. Moore; Mr. Chambers Baird; Mr. R. E. Campbell and Messrs. W. D. & E. R. Young, for .defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Siiauck, C.'J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10619.
    Doering et al. v. City of Cincinnati et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Mr. R. B. Smith; Mr. Albert Bettinger; Mr. A. J. Freiberg; Messrs. Cohen & Mack and Mr. C. A. Groom, for plaintiffs in error. Mr* Jesse Lowman, city solicitor; Mr. W. B. Wheeler and Mr. A. V. Taylor, for defendants in error:
   We are all of the opinion that the act whose validity is involved in this case is an exercise of the police power, subject' to all the constitutional limitations which in their nature are applicable to that power. Upon other questions presented we do not find such concurrence of opinion as enables us to do more.than announce that the judgment is affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.


text:
    No. 10625.
    The State, ex rel. North Bend Village School District, v. The Mt. Nebo Special School District et al.
    Decided June 28, 1907.
    Error to Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Messrs. Ireton, Collins, Schoenle & Poor, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Pi. J. Buntin, for 'defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price and Crew, JJ., concur.


author: Davis, J.

text:
    The State, ex rel. Webber, Prosecuting Attorney, v. Wickham, Recorder.

      General index of county recorder — Recorder not compelled to keep up same, when — Sections n$4 and 1155, Revised Statutes.

    Under the provisions of Section 1155, Revised Statutes, a recorder cannot be compelled to keep up general indexes provided for by Section 1154, Revised Statutes, and theretofore authorized and completed, when the commissioners of the county refuse to pay therefor.
    (No. 10369
    Decided October 22, 1907.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin County.

      Messrs. Webber, McCoy, King & Game, for plaintiff in error.
    Any action taken by the commissioners without warrant of law is not binding on the county, and is of no force or validity as an act of the county.
    The county commissioners have such powers and such only as are conferred by statute. They are restricted to the exercise of the powers conferred upon them by statute. Commissioners v. Railway Co., 45 Ohio St., 401; Commissioners v. Leighty et al., 1 C. C., N. S., 431.
    A grant of power to them must be strictly construed. Treadwell v. Commissioners, 11 Ohio St., 190; Jones, Auditor, v. Commissioners, 57 Ohio St., 213.

      Mr. M. E. Thrailkill, for defendant in error.
    On the construction of statutes, see Lewis’ Sutherland Statutory Construction, 2d ed., Sections 485, 582.
    Courts are inclined to put an equitable construction upon statutes, which are brief and general in their terms.
    The Supreme Court of Ohio favors a liberal construction in remedial matters. In Lucky v. Brandon, 1 Ohio, 49, the court said in announcing a rule of construction, that a case should be decided “upon principle and sound practical' sense,” and in the case of Allen v. Little, 5 Ohio, 66, the court said in announcing a rule of statutory construction, that “every statute should receive such construction as is consistent with the common sense of that community.”
    The legislature evidently intended to provide for “General Alphabetical Indexes,” as well as for the “Plat System,” and the purpose and policy of the law is the guide in statutory construction. State, ex rel., v. Brewster, Auditor, 44 Ohio St., 249; Heck v. State, 44 Ohio St., 536; Cross v. Armstrong, 44 Ohio St., 613.
    The legislative acts relating to these indexes show an intent to provide for general indexes, but this is qualified by a special condition precedent, that the county commissioners find a necessity for and direct or authorize these indexes to be made. A general intent is controlled by a particular condition precedent. 2 Lewis’ Sutherland Statutory Construction, Section 351. The directions and authority of the county commissioners to the recorder is concurrent with the duty of. the recorder to do the work. In this case the recorder stood ready and willing to do the work, but the county commissioners refused to carry out their part of the statutory conditions. The plaintiff herein claims that these indexes should be made under Section 1153, Revised Statutes, but the indexes provided for in that section are paid for by the parties depositing the instrument, and have been kept up to date by the recorder, as found by the circuit court. This finding is conclusive against the relator. Piad the county commissioners directed the county recorder to keep up these general indexes, and he had refused, we admit that a writ of mandamus should issue; but since he stood ready to make these indexes, and the county commissioners refused to perform the conditions precedent on their part, the writ should be denied.
   Davis, J.

In February, 1883, the commissioners of Franklin county contracted with the recorder to prepare an index of deeds and mortgages according to a special plan, for a stipulated price, “said indexing with respect to names of the several parties to each instrument to be done as now required by law.” The only specific provisions of law relating to this subject were then, as now, Sections 1153, 1153a, 1154 and 1155, Revised Statutes. This contract was performed by the recorder then in office; and the indexes thus completed have been kept up by the successors in the recorder’s office until November 1, 1905, at which time the commissioners of the county notified the recorder that they would no longer pay for keeping up these indexes. Upon receiving this notice, the recorder discontinued the indexes which had been completed and kept up under the contract made in 1883, but continued to make the indexes required by Sections 1153 and 1153a. The prosecuting attorney then instituted this proceeding to compel the recorder to keep up, without compensation, the indexes which he had discontinued after notice from the commissioners that they would no longer pay for the work. The circuit court found that the recorder had been, and was, complying with the requirements of Sections' 1153 and 1153a, except in some details which the court ordered to be corrected; that the indexes which arq the subject of this litigation are not the indexes required by Section 1153a; and. that the relator is not entitled to a writ of mandamus commanding the recorder to bring up to date the indexes in controversy and to keep up the same in the future. The circuit court also refused to state as a conclusion of law, as requested by the relator, that the indexes which the recorder has refused to continue without compensation are not indexes authorized by Section 1154, Revised Statutes.

The only provision for “general indexes” is in Section 1154, and there it is provided that such indexes shall be made “in addition to the alphabetical indexes,” that is, separate, and distinct therefrom. The distinctive characteristic of such general indexes is that they present at a glance a sort of abstract of the conveyance in addition to an alphabetical reference to the conveyance itself; and they present also a means of tracing all the conveyances and instruments affecting the title to any particular piece of real estate. These are matters of great convenience and value, especially in populous communities where the records are voluminous. The circuit court has stated in its findings of fact in this case that the general indexes contain the names of both parties to the instrument alphabetically arranged under appropriate headings, the year when filed for record, the reference to the volume and the page thereof where the instrument is recorded, and a summary description of the property conveyed, by reference to the town or township, lot, section or survey, addition or subdivision in which the property is located. The description of the indexes which are the subject of this controversy, as found by the circuit court, brings them clearly within the provisions of Sections 1154 and 1155; and they are not provided for or required by any other sections. These “general indexes” are to be made only when in the opinion of the county commissioners they are needed and they so direct; but the power to direct and the obligation to pay are reciprocal; for, while the recorder shall make the indexes when directed by the commissioners, the statute is just as imperative that he shall receive compensation. So that when the commissioners notified the recorder that they would no longer pay for the service, the latter was necessarily relieved from the duty of further performing it.

The relator insists, however, that whether or not these “general indexes” are authorized by Section 1154, they having been made, the recorder is required by Section 1155 to “keep up the same;” but here again the reciprocal nature of the obligation, on one side, to perform the service and, on the other side, to pay for it is carefully preserved, and it follows that when the commissioners notified the recorder, in advance, that they would not pay, they absolved him from that obligation to perform which was based on their obligation to pay.

The circuit court found that the recorder has substantially complied with the requirements of Sections 1153 and 1153a, and we think that its conclusions in that respect were also correct. The judgment of the circuit court is

Affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.


author: Spear, J,

text:
    The State, ex rel. Hunt, Prosecuting Attorney, v. Fronizer et al.

      Contract executed with county for building bridges — Void under Section 2834b, Revised Statutes — Action under Section 1277, Revised Statutes, to recover money paid by county under contract — Offer to put contractor in statu quo, necessary, when.

    Section 1277, Revised Statutes, which authorizes a prosecuting attorney to bring action to recover back money of the county which has been misapplied, or illegally drawn from the county treasury, does not authorize the recovery back of money paid on a county commissioners’ bridge contract fully executed but rendered void by force of section 28346, because of the lack, through inadvertence, of a certificate by the county auditor that the money is in the treasury to the credit of the fund, or has been levied and is in process of collection, there being no claim of unfairness or fraud in the making, or fraud or extortion in the execution of such contract for such work, nor any claim of effort to put the contractor in statu quo by a return of the bridge or otherwise, the same having been accepted by the board of commissioners and incorporated as part of the public highway.
    (No. 10343
    Decided October 22, 1907.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Sandusky county.
    The State, on the relation of the prosecuting attorney of Sandusky county, brought its action in the common pleas of that county against S. M. Fronizer, N. V. Elliott and The Bellefontaine Bridge and Iron Company, by virtue of section 1277, Revised Statutes, for the sum of $1931, as money illegally drawn from the treasury of said county by the defendants.
    The substance of the petition as amended avers the making on and before July 18, 1903, of certain contracts by the defendant Company through its agent Fronizer, with a majority of the board of county commissioners, for furnishing the materials. and performing the work therein specified for the construction of certain bridges in Sandusky county, and the repair of other bridges, at prices therein named, the same to be paid on the first day of January, 1904, on the completion of the same. The contracts so made were illegal, contrary to and in violation of law, and unlawful, as the defendants Fronizer and the Company, as also the said commissioners then well knew. Said board did not, nor did any member thereof, before nor at the time of entering into said contracts, nor at any other time, procure the certificate of the county auditor as required by section 2834b, Revised Statutes; that the money required for the payment of the obligation created by the contracts, or any part thereof, was in the treasury of said county to the credit of the bridge fund of said county, or had been levied and placed on the duplicate of said county and in process of collection and not appropriated for any other purpose, as in said statute provided; nor any such certificate made and filed by the county auditor at the time said contracts were entered into, and no such fund not otherwise appropriated was in the treasury of said county at the time of the payment of said obligations. The prices and amounts agreed upon in said contracts were exorbitant, largely, grossly and fraudulently in excess of the true and reasonable value thereof; to-wit, double the real value thereof and more as the defendants Fronizer and the Company then and there well knew, to the great damage of the county and the taxpayers thereof.
    The said contracts were entered into secretly between two of the board of county commissioners and Fronizer, who then and there purposely and fraudulently kept and concealed all their acts and movements concerning said contracts from the other member of the board, and said contracts, nor any of them, were never entered in open public board meeting or session of the board; nor was any minute or record made by the commissioners or the auditor of any proceedings in making said contracts in the journal or proper record of said board.
    On the 20th day of December, 1903, and before any sum was due and payable according to the terms of said' illegal contracts, said defendants (Elliott claiming to be agent for the Company), well knowing the contracts to be so fraudulent, illegal and wrongful, wrongfully procured the allowance by two of the commissioners, who then well knew that said contracts were so fraudulent, illegal and wrongful, procured from the treasury of said county payment of the amount of said illegal contracts, to-wit: the sum of $1931.00 which relator demands to be paid back into the treasury of the county.
    The three defendants filed separate answers but in substance the same. They admitted that the Company, through Fronizer, entered into the contracts set forth; that they were informed and believed that in making the contracts the commissioners inadvertently failed and neglected to procure the certificates of the auditor of the county, as set out in the petition, and that said auditor inadvertently failed and neglected to make and file such certificates before said contracts were entered into; they admit the allegations of the petition as to the omission of such certificates. They admit the voluntary payment to the Company’s agents and aver that each and every of said contracts has been and was, before bringing of this action, fully performed and executed, and the defendants deny each and every allegation of the petition not hereinbefore specifically admitted to be true; and especially deny all allegations of fraud, conspiracy, excessive prices and fraudulent conduct on part of any of defendants, and of damages. As an affirmative defense it was pleaded that before any of the Company’s claims for said bridges, repairs, etc., had been adjudicated or payments made thereon, each and all the bridges, materials and repairs mentioned in several causes of action in the petition, had been in good faith duly furnished to said Sandusky county and erected and placed in all respects as required by the several contracts therefor, which have been fully executed and performed; that said bridges, materials and repairs on being so erected, furnished and placed, were received, accepted and appropriated to its own use by said county and by the board of county commissioners thereof who had then full jurisdiction and power and authority over the matter of the purchase and erection of said bridges, materials and repairs for said county and who then had full knowledge of all the facts concerning the making of the contracts therefor. Ever since said bridges, etc., were so received, accepted and appropriated, they have been retained in the possession of said board and its successors, and of said county, and have been constantly used and enjoyed by them and by the inhabitants and taxpayers of said county as necessary and essential parts of the public structures and highways -of said county, and no part of said bridges, materials or repairs, or of the value thereof, has ever been offered or tendered back to the defendants or any of them by said county or any of its officers or authorities.
    To this defense the relator interposed a general demurrer. On hearing, this demurrer was overruled, and the relator not desiring to plead further, judgment was entered dismissing the petition and for costs. This judgment being affirmed by the circuit court relator brings this proceeding in error.

      Mr. M. W. Hunt, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Basil Meek, for plaintiff in error,
    cited and commented upon the following authorities:

      Bridge Co. v. Campbell et al., 60 Ohio St., 406; Printing Co. v. State, 68 Ohio St., 362; Jones, Auditor, v. Commissioners, 57 Ohio St., 189; Black's Law Dictionary, “Rescission”; Insurance Co. v. Hull, 51 Ohio St., 270; Davis v. Justice, 31 Ohio St., 367.

      Mr. S. PI. West; Messrs. Hunt & Gam; Mr. Lester Wilson and Messrs. Kline, Tolies & Goff, for defendants in error,
    cited and commented upon the following authorities:

      State, ex rel., v. Zumstein et al., 4 C. C., 268; 2 Cir. Dec., 539; State, ex rel., v. Fronizer et al., 28 C. C., 709; Lessee of Bond v. Swearingen, 1
      Ohio, 403; Felix v. Griffiths, 56 Ohio St., 39; Insurance Co. v. Bernard et al., 33 Ohio St., 459; Brown v. Witter, 10 Ohio, 143; Dudley et al. v. Little., 2 Ohio, 504; Lear et al. v. McMillen, 17 Ohio St., 464; Follett v. Saviers, 35 Bull., 222; Reed v. McGrew, 5 Ohio, 375; Taft v. Wildman, 15 Ohio, 123; Williamson v. Moore, 2 Disney, 30; Railroad Co. v. Steinfeld, 42 Ohio St., 449; Saxton v. Seiberling, 48 Ohio St., 554; Insurance Co. v. Burke, 69 Ohio St., 294; Trustees v. Cherry, 8 Ohio St., 565; Lee v. Monroe County, 14 O. F. D., 43; Marsh v. Fulton County, 10 Wall., 676; Louisiana v. Wood, 102 U. S., 294; Chapman v. County of Douglas, 107 U. S., 348; Bridge Co. v. Town of Utica, 17 Fed Rep., 316; Riddle v. Bryan et al., 5 Ohio, 49; State v. Blake et al., 2 Ohio St., 147; Pancoast v. Ruffin et al., 1 Ohio, 381; Medical College v. Zeigler et al., 17 Ohio St., 52; State, ex rel., v. Dombaugh, Clerk, 20 Ohio St., 167; Dwarris, 144, 230; Sutherland Statutory Construction, sections 217, 231, 263, 266, 282, 325; McIntyre et al. v. Ingraham et al., 35 Miss., 25; Fosdick v. Village of Perrysburg, 14 Ohio St., 472; Doll v. Barr, 58 Ohio St., 113; Gas Co. v. City of Tiffin et al., 59 Ohio St., 420; City of Cincinnati v. Holmes, Admr., 56 Ohio St., 104; Crane v. Reader et al., 22 Mich., 322; Pretty v. Solly, 26 Beavan, 610; Gardner v. Collins et al., 2 Peters, 93; Brower et al. v. Hunt et al., 18 Ohio St., 341; McDowell v. Sapp, 39 Ohio St., 558; Goshorn et al. v. Purcell, 11 Ohio St., 641; Stetson v. Bank, 2 Ohio St., 167; Printing Co. v. State, 68 Ohio St., 362; Krause et al. v. Morgan, 53 Ohio St. 26; Reynolds v. Hindman, 32 Ia., 146; Taylor,

      Admx., v. Manufacturing Co., 143 Mass., 470; Grand, Admr., v. Railroad Co., 83 Mich., 564; Holum, Admr., v. Railway Co., 80 Wis., 299; Abbott v. Wood, 22 Me., 541; Renfoe et al. v. Colquitt, Governor, 74 Ga., 618; Moore v. Given, 39 Ohio St., 661; Brigel v. Starbuck, 34 Ohio St., 285; Black on Interpretation, section 46; Maxwell on Interpretation, 249; Bank v. Moore, 78 Pa. St., 407; Moore v. Hershey, 78 Pa. St., 196; Emmert v. City of Elyria, 74 Ohio St., 185; Insurance Co. v. Hull, 51 Ohio St., 270; Lee v. Commissioners, 114 Fed. Rep., 744; 52 C. C. A., 376.
   Spear, J,

A somewhat extended epitome of the pleadings has been given in order that the' general character of the controversy may be the more easily comprehended. But the real question presented to this court is in a very narrow compass. Whatever the actual facts may be, the demurrers of the relator to the answers admit, for the purposes of the inquiry, the truth of the allegations therein well pleaded, and if those allegations constitute a defense to the relator's claim to recover back the money paid on the contracts for the bridges, etc., then there is no error in the judgment below. It is to be borne in mind that this is not an action in injunction to prevent the paying out of money from the treasury, nor to recover damages by reason of faulty work or excessive charges, but is simply an action to recover back the money paid under the contracts for the bridges, repairs, etc.; and further, that the contracts, though void are not, under the facts admitted by the pleadings, in this case, tainted.

The inquiry involves consideration of section 2834b, Revised Statutes, the pertinent provisions of which are:

“The commissioners of any county * * * shall enter into no contract, agreement or obligation involving the expenditure of money, nor shall any resolution or order for the appropriation or expenditure of money, be passed by any board of county commissioners * * * unless the auditor * * * shall first certify that the money required for the payment of such obligation or appropriation is in the treasury to the credit of the fund from which it is to be drawn, or has been levied and placed on the duplicate and in process of collection and not appropriated for any other purpose; which certificate shall be filed and immediately recorded, * * * and all contracts, agreements or obligations, and all orders or resolutions, entered into or passed contrary to the provisions of this section shall be void.”

Also of section 1277, affording a right of action to the prosecuting attorney, which is in these terms, to-wit:

“Sec. 1277. (Duty as to restraining order.) The prosecuting attorneys of the several counties of the state, upon being satisfied that the funds of the county, or any public moneys in the hands of the county treasurer or belonging to the county, are about to be, or have been misapplied, or that any such public moneys have been illegally drawn out of, or withheld from the county treasury, or that a contract in contravention of the laws of this state has been, or is about to be entered into, or has been or is being executed, or that a contract was procured by fraud or corruption, or that any property, real or personal, belonging to the county is being illegally used or occupied, or is being used or occupied in violation of the terms of any contract, or that the terms of any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the county are being violated, or that any money is due the county, may apply, by civil action in the name of the state, to a court of competent jurisdiction, to restrain such contemplated misapplication of funds, or the completion of any such illegal contract not fully completed, or to recover back, for the use of the county, all such public moneys so misapplied or so illegally drawn out or withheld from the county treasury, or to recover, for the benefit of the county any damages resulting from the execution of any such illegal contract, or to recover, for the benefit of the county, any such real or personal property so used or occupied or to recover, for the benefit of the county, any damages resulting from the non-performance of the terms of any contract, or to otherwise enforce the same, or to recover any such money due the county.”

And, putting the question presented in terse form, it is whether or not section 1277, as above given, authorizes the recovery back of money paid on a county commissioners’ bridge contract fully executed but rendered void by force of section 2834ft, because of the lack through inadvertence, of the county auditor’s certificate as therein required, there being no claim of unfairness or fraud in the making, or fraud or extortion in the execution of such contract for such work, nor any claim of effort to put the contractor in statu quo by a return of the bridge or otherwise, the same having been accepted by the board of commissioners and incorporated as part of the public highway. ■

This court is of opinion that such recovery. is not authorized. , The principle applicable to the situation is the equitable one that where one has acquired possession of the property of another through an unauthorized and void contract, and has paid for the' same, there can be no recovery back of the money paid without putting, or showing readiness to put, the other party in statu quo, and that rule controls this case unless such recovery is plainly authorized by the statute. The rule rests upon that principle of common honesty that imposes an obligation to do justice upon all persons, natural as well as artificial, and is recognized in many cases. Chapman v. County of Douglas, 107 U. S., 348; Lee v. Board of Commissioners, 52 C. C. A., 376; Bridge Co. v. Utica, 17 Fed Rep., 316.

It is an equally well established rule that the general assembly will not be presumed to have intended to abrogate a settled rule of the common law unless the language used in a statute clearly imports such intention. Holum, Admr., v. The C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 80 Wis., 299; Reynolds v. Hindman, 32 Iowa, 146; Renfroe v. Colquitt, 74 Ga., 618; Felix v. Griffiths, 56 Ohio St., 39.

We look in vain for any such intention clearly expressed in section 1277. Whatever right of action is given b}?- that section is devolved upon the prosecuting attorney, and the suit below was grounded upon that section and that alone. By it that officer is authorized, whenever in his judgment money of the county has been illegally drawn from the treasury, or misapplied, to apply by civil action in the name of the state to a court of competent jurisdiction to recover back the money so illegally drawn or misapplied. Here the power or right expressed ends. It does not appear that it was the intention to deprive a party who has dealt with the county honestly, and in good faith, of any legitimate defense or to impose upon the court any duty to ignore the well established rules of jurisprudence and adjudge in favor of the plaintiff upon his application whether such demand violates fundamental principles of law or not. In the absence of legislative intent clearly expressr ed, we must conclude that none was intended. As stated in Felix v. Griffiths, supra: “Where it is attempted to abrogate or modify a well established rule of common law by statute * * * the scope should not be extended beyond the plain import of the words used, where reasonable effect can be given to the amendriient without such extension.” Here reasonable effect can be given the section without extension because the right to sue for damages is clearly expressed.

The exact question arising upon this record has not before been presented to this court, although the statute itself was under review in Vindicator Printing Company v. State, 68 Ohio St., 362. That case is authority for the proposition that there may be a recovery back by the prosecuting attorney where the money has been paid for the publishing of certain notices the publication of which was not authorized by law. The publications were not only without authority of law but they were of no value to either the county or the public. Therefore no property of the company had been obtained by the county. Clearly the case is not analogous to the case at bar.

Buchanan Bridge Company v. Campbell, 60 Ohio St., 406, is cited. That case simply holds that a contract for a bridge made in violation or disregard of the statutes on the subject, is void, and no recovery can be had against the county for its value. Courts will leave parties where they have placed themselves and refuse relief. It is difficult to see that this case aids the plaintiff’s contention.

The county should not be permitted to retain both the consideration and the bridges. And, as in the case above cited the court left the bridge company where it found it, so in this case the court leaves the county of Sandusky where it finds it.

The judgment of the circuit court will be

Affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.