text:
    Henline et al v. Reese.

      Ministerial officer not obliged to serve process issued by court without jurisdiction — May safely do so if process regulo.r in form.

    While a ministerial officer is not obliged to seirve process in Ms bands, when he has knowledge from other sources that the court or officer issuing it was without jurisdiction of the person against whom it is directed, he will, nevertheless, be justified in executing it according to its command, if regular in form, and the want of jurisdiction does not appear upon its face.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to. the Circuit Court of Wood county.
    The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

      Dodge <& Canary, for plaintiffs in error.
    We confidently claim the affirmative of the following proposition. That process, regular upon its face, issued by a court having power to issue the writ, no want of jurisdiction appearing upon the writ, will protect the officer even if owing to some fact not appearing on the face of the writ, it it should be adjudged void. Earl v. Camp, 16 Wend. 562.
    The same point where the writ is issued without jurisdiction, that it will protect the officer who executes it; Newburg v. Munshower, 29 O. S., 617; Sheldon v. Van Buskirk, 2 N. Y., 473; Savacol v. Boughton, 5 Wendal 170.
    The officer is protected though the affidavit on which the process is founded is not in compliance with the statute. Melcher v. Scrubbs, 72 Missouri, 406. See also Clark v. May, 11 Mass., 243; Whitworth v. Clifton, 1 M. & R.,531; Tarlton v. Fisher, 2 Douglas, 671; Wilmarth v. Burt, 7 Met. (Mass.), 257; Bragg v. Thompson, 19 South Carolina, 572;
      Whipple v. Kent, 2 Gray, 410; 61 Am. Dec., 470; Chase v. Ingals, 97 Mass., 524. It-is not the officer’s duty to question apparently regular process; Perdue v. Dodd, 1 Lea (Tenn.), 710; Hatch v. Saunders, 66 Mich., 181. The duties and liabilities of constables within the scope of their authority, are measured by the rules applicable to sheriffs. Bound to execute process valid upon its face: Billings v. Russell, 23 Penn. State, 192; protected from liability for serving process valid upon its face, McDonald v. Wilkie, 13 Illinois, 22; 54 Am. Dec.,423; Fortner v. Flannagan, 3 Port. (Ala.,) 257.
    It is said that the justice issued the summons and order of delivery, without a proper affidavit having been filed.
    Well, what if he did? Is the constable to be held liable upon his bond for the error of the justice?
    It was not necessary that the affidavit should be signed at all. We have no statute requiring it. It is sufficient if the jurat is signed by the proper officer. See Encyclopedia of Pleading and Practice,vol. 1, p. 315; also 41 O. S., 689.

      Baldwin <& Harrington, for defendant in error.
    The petition states two causes of action. The first, arising from the alleged misconduct of the constable, is predicated upon his official bond. The second, making a part thereof all the allegations of the first cause of action, sets forth more fully the liability of the justice who was also surety upon said bond. Confessedly the justice of the peace had no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant in error, William T. Reese, and under the laws of the state, had no right or power to institute or maintain such action against him. See. 584, R. S.; McCleary v. McLain, 2 O. S., p. 369; especially 371.
    The constable’s authority to serve process in civil actions is limited by the restrictions and provisions of the law, sections 6688 and 6695 R. S.
    The act of the constable constituted official misconduct. Ohio, etc. v. Jennings et al, 4 O. S., p. 419.
    The constable and justice both knew when the action- was instituted that jurisdiction could not be acquired over the defendant in that action, the said William T. Reese.
    If any persons are held to the universal maxim “that all men are bound to know the law, ” it should be the officers whose duty it is to administer and execute the law.
    If the justice exceeds his powers the whole proceeding is coram non juMce, and all concerned in such void proceeding are trespassers. 5 Wait’s A. and D., p. 35 bot.
    If the constable has knowledge aliunde of the want of jurisdiction in the justice his writ will not protect him. McDonald v. Wilkie, 13 Ill., p. 22; S. C. 54 Am. Dec., p. 423 and note; Grace v. Mitchell, 31 Wis., p. 533; S. C. 11 Am. Rep., p. 613; Truesdale v. Combs, 33 O. S., p. 186; Leachman v. Daugherty, 81 Ia., p. 328.
    A justice of the peace is held strictly to the limits of his jurisdiction, and if he transcends it, he is answerable to anyone whose rights are thereby invaded. Truesdale v. Combs, Supra; Masters v. Johnson, Tappan, p. 238; Place v. Taylor et al., 22 O. S.. p. 317; McCurdy v. Baughman, 43 O. S., p. 78; Robbins v. Clemens, 41 O. S., p. 285.
   Williams, C. J.

The original action was brought in the court of common pleas of Wood county, by William. T. Reese, the defendant in error, against Jonas Henline and Nathan W. Stafford, on the bond of Henline as constable of Liberty township in that county, to which office he had been duly chosen; Stafford being surety on the bond. The bond, which was duly executed, is in the usual form, conditioned for the faithful performance by Heniine of his duties as such constable. The alleged breach of the condition consisted of a seizure by the constable, of certain chattel property of the plaintiff, on a writ of replevin issued against him by Stafford as a justice of the peace of the same township, which office he then held. The writ, it is claimed, was void for want of jurisdiction of the justice to issue it, and the constable and his surety became liable on the bond for the damages sustained by Reese in consequence of the' proceedings under it. Upon issues joined in the action, the cause was tried to the court, and a finding made of the facts, which, in addition to those already stated, are, in substance, as follows: (1.) At the time of the commencement of the replevin suit, and the service of the writ, Reese was not a resident of Liberty township, but resided, and was a householder in another township of Wood county, which was known to both the justice and constable; (2.) The affidavit filed by the plaintiff in the replevin suit was not signed by him, though it was in fact sworn to by him before the justice, who certified thereto, and it contained a proper description of the property, and a statement of all facts required by the statute; (3.) The writ of replevin issued by the justice and delivered to the 'constable was in due form of law, regular on its face, and disclosed no want of jurisdiction of the justice to issue it; (4.) The constable found the property described in the writ, in his township, and there took the same into his possession, caused it to be appraised, and, after taking from the plaintiff an undertaking in replevin in' the requisite amount, delivered the property to him; (5.) At the time of the seizure of the property, the constable finding Reese in the township where the writ was issued, made personal service there upon him of a summons, which accompanied the writ of replevin, but did not deliver to him a copy of the latter writ-: (6.) Return was made of the process and undertaking, to the justice in due time, and afterward on the return day, Reese filed his motion before the justice of the peace to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction of his person, which was sustained, and the suit accordingly dismissed; whereupon demand was made of the constable for the return of the property, which he was unable to comply with, having previously delivered it to the plaintiff in the suit and filed his undertaking with the justice. The court also found the amount of the plaintiff’s damages,- if upon the facts he should be entitled to recover any; but, being of opinion that on the facts found, the defendants were not liable on the bond, judgment was rendered in their favor; which judgment the circuit court reversed, holding that on the facts found, the plaintiff should have judgment, and accordingly rendered judgment for him. We are called upon to decide which of these judgments is the correct one.

The omission of the plaintiff in the replevin suit to sign the affidavit upon which he obtained the writ, was at most an irregularity which did not invalidate the writ, nor deprive the constable of protection in executing its command. A ministerial officer, before executing process placed in liis hands, is not obliged to inquire into the regularity of the proceedings of the tribunal from which it emanates, and determine at his peril whether it was lawfully issued or shall be obeyed. His duty is to execute it, if in dqe form of law, regular on its face, and comes duly authenticated from a court or magistrate having jurisdiction of the subject matter.

The position taken by counsel for the defendant in error, which was apparently adopted by the circuit court is, that the justice issuing the writ was without jurisdiction of the' case, because the defendant did not reside in his township, but was a resident householder of another township of the same county; and that fact being known to the constable, his writ afforded no justification for any act done under it. The statute affecting the jurisdiction of justices of the peace in this respect, provides that a resident householder or free holder of the county shall not be held to answer a summons in a civil matter in any township of such county, other than the one in which he resides, except when there is no justice of the townsnip where he resides, or the only justice therein is interested in the controversy or is related in certain degrees to either of the parties. Assuming here, without intending to be understood,.as so holding, that knowledge that the defendant was a resident householder of another township constituted knowledge of a wantof jurisdiction of the justice to issue the writ, it does not follow, we think, that the constable must be held liable for executing it, when done in a lawful manner. The justice unquestionably had jurisdiction of actions for the replevin of property of the kind described in the writ, and to issue such process. That delivered by him to the constable for service was duly authenticated, regular in form and substance, disclosing no want of jurisdiction to issue it, and in all respects was such a writ as the justice had apparent authority to issue; so that, any knowledge the constable may have had concerning the defendant's residence was derived from sources outside of the writ. We understand the rule in such a case to be, that while a ministerial officer who has knowledge from a source other than the writ that the court or magistrate issuing it is without jurisdiction of the person against whom it is directed, is not obliged to serve it, and may decline to do so without creating a liability for his failure, he may, nevertheless, relying on its regularity, execute it according to its command, and plead it in justification of his acts in doing so. Crocker on Sheriffs, section 283; Swan’s Treat., 504; People v. Warren, 5 Hill. 440; Webber v. Gay, 24 Wend., 485; Watson v. Watson, 9 Conn., 140; Wilmarth v. Burt, 7 Metc., 257; Erskine v. Hohnbach, 14 Wall., 613; Wall v. Trumbull, 16 Mich. 228, 233, and see Taylor v. Alexander, 6 Ohio, 145; Harmon v. Gould, Wright’s R., 709; Sanford v. Nichols, 13 Mass., 286-288. We are aware that there are some cases which hold a different doctrine; but the rule, as we have stated it, is maintained by the great weight of authority, and rests upon sound reason. It is essential to an efficient administration of the law, that there be effectual execution of legal process, to the accomplishment of which promptness and expedition are necessary. Questions of jurisdiction are often difficult of correct determination, depending sometimes for their proper decision upon complications of fact, and involving the employment of legal learning and judicial investigation ; and to require ministerial officers with, process in their hands for execution to stop and determine such questions by looking beyond the face of the process, before proceeding to execute its precepts, would not only be incompatible with the.nature of their office, and the proper discharge of their duties, but must necessarily retard the administration of justice, and often obstruct or defeat the remedies of parties. The officer may honestly believe that he is in possession of information beyond the writ, that deprived the tribunal from which it came of jurisdiction over the party, and yet be mistaken; or he may in good faith believe there was such jurisdiction, and yet have knowledge of facts which excluded it; and if he could be charged with a liability for every such erroneous, though honest judgement, ■ on the question of jurisdiction, it is not difficult to understand the delays and embarrassments that must result in the business of the courts. This case not inaptly serves to show the difficulties of such a rule. It is contended the constable was sufficiently apprised of the justice’s want of jurisdiction to entertain the action against the defendant in replevin, because he knew the defendant was a resident householder of another township in the county; but it is evident that under the statute that fact alone was not sufficient to deprive the justice of jurisdiction, for, notwithstanding that fact, the jurisdiction would exist if there were no justice in the defendant’s township who was disinterested, or who was not related, in the prohibited degrees, to either of the parties; so that, to wholly exclude the jurisdiction of the justice, all of those facts must concur, and therefore, knowledge of one of them only, would not be knowledge that the justice was without jurisdiction.

If ■ it were true that as between the parties in such an action, when the defendant should prove he was a resident householder of a different township it would then be incumbent on the plaintiff, in order to sustain the jurisdiction, to prove one of the other facts which authorize the justice to entertain the action, such a rule could hardly be applicable in a suit against the constable on his bond, for executing process issued by the justice, unless, having information which, if followed up by diligent inquiry would lead to knowledge of all the facts which would exclude the justice’s jurisdiction, he is to be charged with such knowledge. That would involve a large inquiry, and make the officer’s liability depend not upon the knowledge he had,but on that which he might have obtained. It is a more reasonable rule, that the officer is entitled to protection in the execution of his writ when it is regular on its face; and that he is not affected by information received outside of it, nor liable for acts done in its proper execution unless there is a want of jurisdiction to issue it which appears from the writ itself.

It is argued that the • facts found by the trial court entitle the plaintiff to judgment against the justice. But we think not. The action is brought on the constable’s bond, and the liability sought to be enforced against the justice is that of surety on the bond; and as the constable is not liable, the surety cannot be held. What remedy the plaintiff may have against the justice, individually, or against the party who instituted the replevin suit, are not questions now before us for determination. We think the judgment of the circuit court was erroneous and must he reversed, and that of the common pleas affirmed.

Judgment accordingly.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: By the Court.

license: Public Domain

text:
    Wile et al. v. Koch.

      Practice — Suit on surety bond in appellate court — Competent to identify name omitted on bond — Failure to state sum does not relieve surety.
    1. In a suit to recover against the surety on an appeal bond the amount of the judgment rendered in the appellate court, it is competent by averment in the petition to identify the appellant whose name was omitted from such bond.
    2. The failure to state in such bond a sum which the surety’s liability shall not exceed will not relieve him from the stipulation that the appellant shall satisfy the judgment which may be rendered against him by the appellate court.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.
    The original action was tried before a justice of the peace and appealed to the court of common pleas, where the plaintiffs in error filed a petition alleging, in substance, that on November 9, 1889, they recovered a judgment against the Nathan Importing Company before Levi P. Bauder, a justice of. the peace; that said company desiring to take an appeal, the defendant Koch executed his bond for that purpose, that the appeal having been perfected, the plaintiffs recovered a judgment in the common pleas against Charles Nathan, doing business as the Nathan Importing Company, and that an execution issued upon the judgment was returned unsatisfied, and that the judgment is unpaid.

      The following is a copy of the bond upon which ' the plaintiffs counted:
    “Whereas, on the 9th day of November, 1889, the said Julius Wile and brother obtained a judgment against the said Nathan Importing Company on the docket of Levi F. Bauder, justice of the peace, for sixtv-six and 5-100 dollars damages, and for ten and 80-100 dollars costs of suit, and 'the said --intend to appeal therefrom to the court of common pleas of the county aforesaid:
    “Now, therefore, I, Moses-Koch, of Cuyahoga county, Ohio, do hereby, pursuant to the statute in such case made aud orovided,' promise and undertake that the said appellant-, if judgment be adjudged against them on the appeal, will satisfy such judgment and costs, not exceeding the sum of-dollars, and I do also undertake, in said last mentioned sum, that the said appellant ■ — - will prosecute - appeal to effect and without necessary delay.
    “Moses Koch, “Bail for Appeal.
    “Executed and acknowledged before me, and surety approved, this 9th day of November, A. D. 1889.
    “Levi F. Bauder, “Justice of the Peace.”
    In the court of common pleas a demurrer to the petition was sustained and a final judgment rendered against the plaintiffs in error which was affirmed by the circuit court.

      White, Johnson c& McOaslin, for plaintiffs in error.

      Emil Joseph, for defendant in error.
   By the Court.

Two propositions are urged in support of the judgments below:

1. That the surety is entitled to stand upon the letter of his obligation and that, the bond being blank as to the limit of his liability and as to the name of the appellant, it is, as to him, void.

2. That the petition shows that the original suit before the justice was against the Nathan Importing Company and the judgment recovered on appeal was against Charles Nathan doing business as the Nathan Importing Company.

Neither proposition will sustain the judgment. Though it is true that the surety is not to be held beyond the terms of his obligation, the terms of his obligation are found in the stipulation that he did “promise and undertake that the said appellant, if judgment be adjudged against them on the appeal, will satisfy such judgment and costs. ’ ’

The obligation thus expressly assumed is not defeated by the failure to insert a sum which his liability should not exceed. It was competent to identify the appellant by averment in the petition and by evidence if the averment should be denied. This would in no degree enlarge the surety’s express obligation to pay the judgment.

Judgments of the circuit and common pleas courts reversed, and cause remanded to the court of common fleas with instructions to overrule the demv/rrer,


text:
    No. 3493.
    The Ohio Valley Gas Co. v. Lythe & Sons.
    (Decided. January 14, 1896 )
    Error to the Circuit Court of Columbiana county.

      W. H. Spence and Á. S. Clark, for plaintiff. in error.

      J. W. Clark and P. C. Young, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3658.
    Cunningham et al. v. Klein et al.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

      MilUJdn, Shotts & MilUJdn WL&Doty & Todhimter, for plaintiffs in error.

      John MoOlellan and A. F. Hume, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3670.
    Smith v. Kingman.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Olds & Olds, for plaintiff in error.

      J. II. Beebe and J. A. Gcvrver, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3672.
    Jones et al. v. Clahane et al.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the' Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Donaldson & Bussing, and J. T. Holmes, for plaintiffs in error.

      FranJa A. Davis, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, C. J., dissents.


text:
    No. 3673.
    Jones et al. v. Borger.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Donaldson & hissing, and J. T. Holmes, for plaintiffs in error.

      Frank -A. Davis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, C. J. dissents.


text:
    No. 3675.
    Griffith et al. v. Murphy.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fairfield county. .

      Thomas IT. Dolson and O. W. Me Gleery, for plaintiffs in eri*or.

      A. I. Vorys and George F, Martin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Young v. Shellenberger, 53 Ohio St., 291.


text:
    No. 4122.
    Meeker v. Helm, Treasurer.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county. •

      Meeker dfc Gaskill, for plaintiff in error.

      Sater dh Robeson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
      No. 4123.
    Meeker v. Helm, Treasurer.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Mee-Jcer <& Gashill and Anderson <& Bowman, for plaintiff in error.

      Sater c§ Bobes.on, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4601.
    Adams v. Nemeyer, Mayor, et al.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      George II. Phelps, for plaintiff in error.

      Pendleton <& Whiteley; Boss d¡ Kinder; J. A. <& K V. Dope; K T. Dunn and A. Zugschwert. for defendants in error.
   The act of the Legislature passed March 31, 1892, authorizing cities having at the last federal census a population of 18,553 to issue and sell the bonds of the' city to be paid by a tax to be levied on the property of the city,, tobe used for the purpose of purchasing grounds and buildings within such* city or its immediate vicinity for manufacturing purposes, 89 Laws, 168, is invalid for two reasons: First: It is a special act of a general nature conferring corporate power; and second: It authorizes the use of the power of taxation by a city for private, and not public, purposes.

Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.


text:
    No. 4744.
    The State of Ohio ex rel. v. Commissioners.
    (Decided January 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      Joseph Frease and Miller & Pomerene, for plaintiff in error.

      Ghcvrles G. Bow, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Wasson v. Commissioners, 49 Ohio St., 622.


text:
    No. 3253.
    Railway Company v. Long, Admr.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Harrison county.

      J. Dunba/r, for plaintiff in error.

      D. A. Hollingsworth, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Spear andBuRKET, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3580.
    City of Columbus v. Williard et al.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Gilbert H Barger, Florizel Smith and Ellsworth G. Irvine, for plaintiff in error.
    Taylor, Taylor <& Taylor for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3655.
    Jacobs v. Robinson.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Jamies M. Tripp and John T Moore, for plaintiff in error.

      J. J. Harper and John Harper, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3656.
    Miller v. Robinson.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      James M. Tripp and John T Moore, for plaintiff in error.

      J. J. Hamper and John Harper, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3674.
    Brasee et al. v. Rockey et al.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fairfield county.

      Brasee <& Brasee and O. IF. Mo Cleery, for plaintiffs in error.

      A. I. Tory8 and George E. Martin, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3685.
    Fisher et al. v. Nairn et al.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Me (fly/re <£> Smyser and W. F. Kean, for plain tiffs in error.

      Mahon Bouoh; John S. Modorran, Yocum c& Tagga/rt, B. F. Eason, Alfred J. Thomas, AnthonyWroght, Daniel Heller and A. D. Metz, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4304.
    Gilliland v. City of Dayton et al.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      Amanuel & Dwyer, W. A. Hallanan and Batter-son <& Mv/rphy, for plaintiff in error.

      William Craighead and Frank Conover, for defendants in error.
   Judgment modified.


text:
    No. 4396.
    Schneider et al. v. City of Columbus.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county

      J. H. Collins, for plaintiffs in error.

      Samuel Hambleton, for defendant in error.
   ■ Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4441.
    Schaal v. Heck.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Lucas county.

      Doyle, Scott <& Lewis, for plaintiff in error.

      Hamilton &Kwby, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shatjck, Spear and Burket, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 4604.
    Street Railroad Company v. Mooney Guardian.
    (Decided January 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Andrew Squire and Kline & lolles, for plaintiff in error.

      Hoyt, Dustin & Kelley, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3571.
    Bachman v. Ryan.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Anderson <& Bowman, for plaintiff in error.

      W. S. Meeker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3574.
    Schmidt v. McBride, Adm’r.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to tlie Circuit Court of Greene county.

      F. P. Cunningham, for plaintiff in error.

      John Walsh, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3575.
    Schmidt v. McBride, Adm’r.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Greene county.

      F. P. Cunningham, for plaintiff in error.

      John Walsh, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3576.
    Georgi v. Weist.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Montgomery county.

      F. Thompson, for plaintiff in error.

      Patterson & Mwrphy and John M. Sprigg, for defendat in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3592.
    Sanfleet v. City of Toledo et al.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to tlie Circuit Court of Lucas county.
    . Pratt Wilson and Balter, Smith da Balter, for plaintiff in error.

      O. S. Brumbaclt, F. IT. Hurd, John F. Kumler and 111 II. A. Bead, City Solicitor, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4579.
    Railroad Company v. Kimmel, Adm’x.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      William H. Bore, Thomas L. Magers and Samuel F. Williamson, for plaintiff in error.

      Thomas Beer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4589.
    Railway Company v. Seegers, Adm’r.
    (Decided January 28, 1896.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.
    Harmon, Qolston, Goldsmith da Iloadly, for plaintiff in error.

      John W. Wolfe and Thomas L. Michie, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Burket and Si-iauck, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3266.
    Frank, Adm’r, v. Baumann et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.
    Error to the Circuit .Court of Montgomery county.

      Young & Young, and .John L. U. Frank, for plaintiff in error.

      Craighead A Craighead, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Ryan v. Rothwiler, Adm’r, 50 Ohio St., 595.


text:
    No. 3269.
    Collins v. Mansfield et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Warren county.

      William Disney and A. C. ColUns, for plaintiff in error.

      Morrill <& Jordan, and Runyan <& Stanley, for defendants1 in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3278.
    Turnbull et al. v. The Pomeroy Salt Co. et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Meigs county.

      W. L. Avery, Ernst Relvm and W. II. Lasley, for plaintiffs in error.

      S. S. Knowles,; Crosvenor, Jones <& Worstell, J. U. Myers, M. M. Granger, Russell As Webster and E. A. Guthrie, for defendants in error;
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3547.
    Young, Adm’x, v. Roberts et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

      Millihin, Shotts db Millihin, A. F. Hume and Wesco db Baker, for plaintiff in error.

      Morey, And/rews db Morey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3568.
    Saxton v. Plymire.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fayette county.

      Levi J. Burgess, for plaintiff in error.

      Van Deman db Ohaffin and John Logan, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed on the authority of Beaton v. Radford, 40 Ohio St.. 106.


text:
    No. 3586.
    Watson v. Morgan et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      John T. Moore, for plaintiff in error.

      James Tripp, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3587.
    Griffith et al. v. Lawson.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Hite c& Courtright, for plaintiffs in error.

      O. T. Clark, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3596.
    Strader et al. v. Long et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      George L. Converse, George K Wash and T J. Keating, for plaintiffs in error.

      Eugene Lane and L. J. Critehfleld, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3597.
    Mendell v. Ewing, Trustee.
    (Decided February 4 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      lallman t& Armstrong and B. B. Doverner, for plaintiff in error.

      Danford <& Danford, and Thayer Melvin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No 3598.
    Craig v. Remy, Treasurer.
    [Decided February 4, 1896.]
    Error to the Circuit Court of Richland county.

      D. Dirlam, for plaintiff in error.

      8. E. Jenner, J. P. Steward and PC. E. Bell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3600.
    Hathaway et al. v. Harlan, Assignee.
    [Decided February 4, 1896.]
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mitchell <& Bruce, for plaintiffs in error.

      PEw'lan & Wood, John A. Gcvrver, Olds, Fluchey & Booster and Andreios <& Barry, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3606.
    Railway Company v. Larzalere.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      W. E. Guerin and F. A. Durbin, for plaintiff in ■error.

      J. B. Stonesypher, for defendant in error,
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3609.
    Nichols, Adm’r, v. Laird et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      A. A. 8tasel, for plaintiff in error.

      8. I. James, T. W. Phillips and Kibler As Kibler, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3613.
    The People’s Bank v. Walton.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wyandot county.

      Alza Garter, D. D. Hare and E. 8. Galleher, for plaintiff in error.

      A. K Walton, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed for the reason that one. of the grounds for reversal is, that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Other questions not passed upon.


text:
    No. 3615.
    Dye v. Thompson, Adm’r, etc.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Mitchell c6 Bruce, for plaintiff in error.

      L. K Powell, John D. DeGolley .and John A. Garver, for defendant in error. . ' .
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3617.
    Williamson, Sheriff et al. v. Mapel et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Putman county.

      Bcviley <& Bailey, for plaintiffs in error.

      Haskell & Sutton, for defendants in error.
   Judgment of circuit court reversed, and judgment of common pleas declaired valid and sufficient to create lien on land in question. Ordered that plaintiffs in error recover from defendants in error all their costs in this court, in circuit court and court of common pleas and defendants in error pay all costs in said courts by them made.


text:
    No. 3625.
    Board of Education v. McVickers, Sr.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Noble county.

      J. M. Mg Ginnis, for plaintiff in error.

      Charles A. Leland and D. S. Spriggs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3641.
    Betz v. Betz Admr.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Gallia county.

      Dcmiel J. Ryan, David B. Ilebard and A. J. Greene, for plaintiff in error.

      Scm/ual A. Hash, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3644
    Coe et al. v. Smith et al.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      II. W. Fa/rnham, W. A. Hutchins and J. W. Ban-non, for plaintiffs in error.

      Holcomb <& Dawson and Thompson db Hard, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3667.
    The News & Telegraph Publishing Company v. Rochelle.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

      F. A. Belden and Millikin, Shotts <& Millikin, for plaintiff in error.

      A. F. Hume and Wesco de Baker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4669.
    Wood, Auditor, et al. v. Jones.
    (Decided February 4, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Monroe county.

      Weems, Walton da Cook and Me Gammon da Fetter er, for plaintiffs in error.

      •I. P. Spriggs, Mallory da Jeffers, Pearson da Okey and Blackmcvrr da Young, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, C. J. and Spear, J., dissent.


text:
    No. 3299. No. 3300. No. 3301. No. 3302. No. 3303. No. 3304. No. 3305. No. 3306. No. 3307. No. 3308. No. 3309. No. 3310. No. 3312. No. 3313. No. 3314. No. 3316. No. 3317. No. 3318.
    Dean et al v. Nichols et al. Same v. Harding. Same v. Nichols et al. Same v. Hutchinson et al. Same v. Monroe, et al. Same v. Conway et al. Same v. Cook. Same v. Conway et al. Same v. Stewart et al. Same v. Shrig et al. Same v. Seibert et al. Same v. Merkle et al. Same v. Winterbottom. Same v. Potts et al. Same v. Roster et al. Same v. Stevens et al. Same v. Simons et al. Same v. Beatty et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Jones <& Jones, S. I-Iambleton, C. T. Clark, George K. Nash and E. W. Eittredge, for plaintiffs in error.
    Ha/rrison, Olds <& Henderson and Rutherford H. Platt, for defendants in error-
   judgment affirmed


text:
    No. 3623.
    Sunderland v. Reihl, Supervisor, et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      William H. Ball and J. T. Crew, for plaintiff in error.

      Winn <& 0 ’Neal and F. H. Southard,• for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3698.
    Post et al. v. Mansfield Savings Bank.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error, to the Circuit Court of Erie county.

      Homer Goodwin, for plaintiffs in error.

      Cummings c& McBride, B. Brinkerhoff.Jr. ■ and Leiois II. Goodwin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3702.
    Sell et al. v. Jaynes.
    (Decided February 7, 1896)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Delaware county.

      II. II Beecher and E. F Poppleton, for plaintiffs in error.

      F. M. Marriott, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3706.
    Dyer et al. v. Railway Co. et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Burch (& Johnson for plaintiffs in error.
    Spiegel, Bromwell & Foraker and Hollister & Hollister, for defendants in error.
   Dismissed for the reason that the brief of the plaintiff in error was not filed in a reasonable time before the call of the case, as required by Rule 4, as revised 1894. The brief of the plaintiff was filed on the Saturday before the call, the call being- made on the following Tuesday.


text:
    No. 3717.
    Wasson v. National Bank et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Alfred J. Thomas and IE. It. Smith, for plaintiff in error.

      Johnson db Taylor and A. D. Metz, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3718.
    Wasson v. Metz et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Alfred J. Thomas and II B. Smith, for plaintiff in error.

      Johnson db Taylor, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3723.
    Will et al. v. Will.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Meigs county,

      Peoples da Fish and Bussell db Webster, for plaintiffs in error.

      W. H. Lasley and A. W Vorhes, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4408.
    Mills v. City Board of Elections et al.
    (Decided February 7, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Daniel J. Ryan and A. J. Greene, for plaintiff in error.

      M. B. Barnhart, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. v. City of Cincinnati, 19 Ohio, 178.

Minshall, C. J. and Bradbury and Burket, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3711.
    Warner v. Fenton.
    (Decided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Ashtabula county.

      Rorthway <& Williams, for plaintiff in error.

      Rowland & Starkey, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3745.
    Newell v. Crosby.
    (Decided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Ashtabula county.

      B. R. Richard and Royt <&• Findlay, for plaintiff in error.

      Rorthway & Fitch and R. W. Calvin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3746.
    Sheetz v. Huberty.
    (Decided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      William J. Piero, for plaintiff in error.

      Wat. O. <& J. S. McLean, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and petition in error in the circuit court dismissed on the authority of Young v. Shallenberger, 53 Ohio St., 291.


text:
    No. 3759.
    Burgert v. Sears.
    (Decided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Huron county.

      McKnight <& Graig, for plaintiff in error.

      Stephen M. Young, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3762.
    Fancier et al. v. State of Ohio.
    (Reeided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Huron county.

      Andn-'ews Bros., for plaintiffs in error.

      J. B. McKnight, Prosecuting Attorney; S. M. Young and O. P. Wickham, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4585.
    Frey v. The City of Findlay.
    (Decided February 25, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      J. A. <& K V. Bope, for plaintiff in error.

      William F. Duncan, for defendant in error.
   Judgment reversed and judgment enjoining assessment on Sandusky street, except as to 47 feet.


text:
    No. 3728.
    Findlay v. Niles.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      William F. Duncan, for plaintiff in error.

      J. A. and F. V. Bope, for defendant in error.
   On consideration whereof, it is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said circuit court be and the same is hereby reversed. And proceeding to render the judgment the circuit court should have rendered it is ordered and adjudged that the prayer of the petition for an injunction against the assessment made on the property of the said defendant for the improvement on Main street, be and the same is hereby denied, and that said assessment be and the same is hereby sustained. And for the improvement made on Sandusky street, it is ordered and adjudged that the assessment therefor be and is hereby set aside; ¡and in view thereof it is ordered that the property of the said defendant be assessed for the improvement on said street, sixty-six and four-tenths feet, being the sum of the breadth of the property, forty-eight feet and the front of the Ramey shop, eighteen and four-tenths feet, the assessment being made at the rate fixed by the ordinance, $5.1015 per feet, amounting to $338.74. It is further ordered and adjudged that each party pay one half the costs to be taxed in this court, and in the circuit court.


text:
    No. 3774.
    Robbins, Adm’r, et al. v. City of Columbus et al.
    Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      E. I. Dewitt, for plaintiffs in error.

      Gilbert M. Ba/rger and E. O. Irvine, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3776.
    City of Zanesville v. Spoerl.
    pecided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      Oha/rles ,G- Griffiths, City Solicitor, for plaintiff in error. *

      W. ■ 3. Ball, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of City of Zanseville-v. Fannan, 53 Ohio St., 605.


text:
    No. 3777.
    Harper, Treasurer, v. White et al.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Pickaway county.

      P. C. Smith and Milton Morris, for plaintiffs in error.

      II. J. Booth and II. P. Folsom, for "defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3778.
    Foltz v. Shick.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wood county.

      Dodge & Canary and S. P. Harrison, for plaintiff in error.

      Frank Taylor and Pendleton & Whiteley, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3780.
    Gilligan v. Sounders.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Perry county.

      Ferguson <& Johnston, for plaintiff in error.

      Donahue, Spencer c& Donahue, for defendant in in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3786.
    Browning & Co. v. Moberly et al.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Highland county.

      George. L. Ga/rret, for plaintiffs in error.

      Steel, Hough de Hog sett, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3790.
    Cowen, Jr., Assignee, v. Peterson.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clermont county.

      WoodKef dé Prather and Pa/rrott de Griffith, for plaintiff in error.

      Frazier dé Hicks, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3796.
    State ex rel. Donahue v. Whitfield et al.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Perry county.

      Donahue da Donahue and John S. Friesner, for plaintiff in error.

      Ferguson de Johnston, Butler & Butler and Ilemry D. Goclwan, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3797.
    McLean, Constable, v. Starbuck.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clinton county.

      Nathcm M. Linton and A. W. Doan, for plaintiff in error.

      Mills & Clevenger, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3801.
    Faulkner et al. v. Clevenger, Executor.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clinton county,

      Doan (& Doan and J. M. Moore, for plaintiffs in ' error.

      Mills <& Clevenger and Frank B. Mills, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3802.
    Wick v. Fulkerson, Executrix.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Shelby county.

      8. 8. McKinney, 8, J. Hatfield and 8. L. Wicoff,, for plaintiff in error.

      Wilson <& Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed on the authority of Pugh v. State ex rel., 51 Ohio St., 116.


text:
    No. 3806.
    Baum et al. v. Griffith.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      Charles C. Upham, for plaintiffs in error.

      Jones c& Hudson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No.3809.
    Chamberlain v. Schwartz.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Lorain county.

      W. B. Thompson and F. G. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.

      C. G. Washburn and P. II. Boynton for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4362.
    Hosea, Trustee, et al. v. City of Cincinnati.
    (Decided March 3, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      William G. Hosea and Wilby <& Wald., for plaintiffs in error.

      Frederick Hertenstein and William H. Whittaker, Corporation Counsel, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3352.
    Simpson et al. v. Carman.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      G. Hammond Avery, for plaintiffs in error.

      Matthews <& Cleveland, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3411.
    Tremain et al. v. Crawford et al.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      John W. Heisley and Everett, Dellenbaugh ds Weed, for plaintiffs in error.

      Foster d> Lawrence, Lee de Tilden and George A. Grooi, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3733.
    Railroad Company v. Elerick.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      Joel W. Tyler and Hetoell K. Kennon, for plaintiff in error.

      George G. McKee for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, J., dissents.


text:
    No. 3770
    Hapgood & Co. v. Marshall.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Brown county.

      Thompson <& Fite, for plaintiffs in error.

      I). V. Pearson and Loudon <Sa Waters, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, J., dissents,


text:
    No. 3825.
    Wise et al. v. Jacobs.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Huron county.

      G. B. Walker and F. TL. Jones,. for plaintiffs in error.

      G. T. <& G. 8. Stewwt, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3831.
    Albright v. Lease et al.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Derr ch Corbett and McCauley <& Weller, for plaintiff in error.

      Bohn c& Baker, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3859.
    Pence, Admr. v. Search, Admr.'
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit court of Miami county.

      8. 8. & J. F. McKinney and M. II. dh W. D. Jones, for plaintiff in error.

      Stephen Johnston, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3861.
    Railroad Company v. Rank.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Williamson & Gushing and Jenner <& Weldon, for .plaintiff in error.

      F. S. Monnett and D. Din-lam, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3863.
    Marvin v. City of Findlay.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      J. A. <& F. V. Dope and II. F Bun-ket, for plaintiff in error.

      W. F. Duncan, A. Blackford, and George 3. Phelps, for defendant in error.
   This court is of opinion that the court of common pleas erred in directing a verdict for the defendant; the cause should have submitted to a jury. On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the said circuit court be and the same is hereby reversed with costs, and this court proceeding to render the j udgment which the circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of the court of common pleas be and the same is hereby reversed. It is further considered and adjudged that the plaintiff in error recover of the defendant in error his costs in this behalf, in this court and in the circuit court, and the cause is remanded to the court of common pleas for a new trial.

Burket J., not sitting.


text:
    No. 3885.
    Masters v. Whitney, Bowen & Co.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      Olds d¡ Olds, for plaintiffs in error.

      John D. DeGolley and John W. Bmrey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3895.
    Keith v. Stanley et al.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Bawd (& Voris, for plaintiff in error.

      Goulder <& Holding, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4734.
    State ex rel. Fisher & Fisher v. Kennedy et al.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Lee <& Tilden, for plaintiff in error.

      P. IT. Frazier, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4765.
    Board of Education v. Board of Education.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Greene county.

      M. J. Hartley, for plaintiff in error.

      Marcus Shcup, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4812.
    Hall et al. v. Watkins et al.
    (Decided March 10, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      John David Jones, prosecuting attorney, and Edward Kibler, for plaintiffs in error.

      S. M. Hunter and J. B. Jones, for defendants in error.
   This court is o'f opinion that the circuit court erred in dismissing the appeal. On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court he and'the same is hereby reversed with costs, and that plaintiffs in • error recover of the defendants in error their costs in this behalf, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court for trial.


text:
    No. 3421.
    Morlock, etc., v. Street Railroad Company.
    (Decided March 17, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      John O. Winship, for plaintiff in error.
    Squires, Sanders <& Dempsey, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No 3832.
    Stamping Company v. Glass Company.
    (Decided March 17, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      1 oilman c6 Armstrong and George Duncan, for plaintiff in error.

      L. Danford and Sedgwich & Me Combs, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3904.
    Peoples v. Glennan.
    (Decided March 17, 1896.)
    Error to the' Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      John J. Adams, for plaintiff in error.

      W. J. Massey, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3931.
    Electric Railway Company v. Wilson.
    (Decided March 17, 1896.)
    ERROR to the Circuit Court of Allen county.

      Cable (& Parmenter, for plaintiff in error.

      James L. Price for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3424.
    Railway Company v. City of Cincinnati.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    ERROR to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Fayette Smith and Smith <& Martin, for plaintiff in error.

      Frederick Uertenstein and William H. Whittaker Corporation Counsel, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3442.
    Stephenson v. Line.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Butler county.

      Millihin, Shotts <& Millikin, for plaintiff in error.

      Stayback, Ilcvrr <& Morphy, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3444.
    Doney v. Clark, Adm’r.
    (Decided March. 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      J. V. Lee and George L. Converse, for plaintiff in error.

      M. B. Patterson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3620.
    Commercial Gazette Job Printing Company v. Kline.
    Decided March 24, 1896.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      W. MoD. Shcm and W. J. Davidson, for plaintiff in error.

      Changes W. Baker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spear, Shauck and Minshall, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3621.
    Commercial Gazette Job Printing Company v. Kline.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      W. MoD. Shaio and W. J. Davidson, for plaintiff in error.

      Charles W. Baker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spear, Shauck and Minshall, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3622.
    Commercial Gazette Job Printing Company v. Kline.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      W. MoD. Shaw and W. J. Bmidson, for plaintiff in error.

      Charles *W. Balter, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spear, Shauck and Minshall, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3826.
    Wise et al. v. King, Receiver.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Huron county.

      G. B. Williams and F. II. Jones, for plaintiffs in error.

      G. T. da. C. II. Stewart, and Andrews Bros., for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3913.
    Webber & Co. v. Swing, Trustees, etc.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Medina county.

      Webber do Turner, for plaintiffs in error.

      George Hayden and G. W. Lewis, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3915.
    Watson Ex’x v. Hare, Treasurer.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wyandot county.

      A. Blachford and John I>. Sears, for plaintiff in error.

      J. B. Jones and Elza Garter, for defendant in error.
   Judgement affirmed.


text:
    No. 3916.
    Haviland et al. v. Chichester et al.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Logan county.

      William Lawrence, West c§ West and James Kernan, for plaintiffs in error.

      Johnston <& Shea, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3922.
    Zimmer v. Worthington.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.
    Taylor, Taylor <& Taylor, for plaintiff in error.

      Ira Crum and George II. Nash, for defendant m error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3925.
    Davey v. Miller, Admr.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clark county.

      John I. Zimmerman and Webb W Witmeyer, for plaintiff in error.
    ■ G. S. Olinger, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.


text:
    No. 3927.
    Villers et al v. McCray.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clinton county.

      Hayes <& Swain, for plaintiffs in error.

      West <& Walker, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3929.
    Fisher & Co. v. Bank.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      James A. Allen, for plaintiffs in error.

      Frank Bathmell, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversing that of the common pleas is affirmed. The judgment rendered by the circuit court after reversal, in favor of the bank, is reversed and the cause remanded to the common pleas for a new trial.


text:
    No. 3942.
    Siegenthaler v. Hartman & Durstine.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      A. D. Metz and John McSweeney, for plaintiff in error.

      Critchfield <& Adair and Frank Taggart, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3954.
    Clark et al. v. Hussey.
    (Decided March 24, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      C. JD. Robertson and 3. A. Miller, for plaintiffs in error.

      II. II Turrill, for defendant in error.
   On consideration whereof, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court be and the same is hereby reversed with costs, it not appearing from the record that the court of common pleas erred in dismissing the action without prejudice, and this court proceeding to render the judgment which the circuit court should have rendered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of the said court of common pleas be and the same is affirmed. And it is further considered and adjudged that the plaintiffs in error recover of the defendant in error their costs in this behalf in this court and in the circuit court expended.


text:
    No. 3446.
    Fostoria Stave and Barrel Company v. Western Assurance Company.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      McGauley <& Weller, for plaintiff in error.

      Doyle, Scott c& Lewis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, it appearing that one of the grounds of reversal by the circuit court was that the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence. The other questions presented not passed upon.


text:
    No. 3447
    Fostoria Stave and Barrel Company v. Trans-Atlantic Fire Insurance Compnay.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Me Gauley <& Weller, for plaintiff in error.

      Doyle,Scott <& Lewis, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed, it appearing that one of the grounds of reversal by the circuit court was that the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence. The other questions presented not passed upon.


text:
    No. 3448.
    Fostoria Stave and Barrel Company v. Germania Insurance Company.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      McCauley do Weller, for plaintiff in error.
    ' Doyle, Scott do Lewis, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, it appearing that one of the grounds of reversal by the circuit court was that the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence. . The other questions presented not passed upon.


text:
    No. 3452.
    Waddle, Assignee, v. Piper et al. Exr’s.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.
    Pogue, Pottenger do Pogue, for plaintiff in error.

      L. C. Black and Swing do Morse, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3456.
    State ex rel. v. Commissioners.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      B. C. Smythe and S. M. Hunter, for plaintiff in error.

      John Da/oid Jones, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. v. Commissioners, 49 Ohio St., 301.


text:
    No. 3750.
    Mansfield et al. v. Franklin Furniture Company.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Skiles dé Skiles and L. Brucker, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. Shrocler, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3864.
    Robson et al. v. City of Cincinnati et al.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton. county.
    • Stephens, Lincoln ds Smith, for plaintiffs in error.

      Frederick Rertenstein and William, II. Whit-taker, Corporation Counsel, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3973.
    Baldwin v. Broadstone, Ex’r.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Greene county.

      Snodgrass <& SclmeMy for plaintiff, in error.

      Heifer ds Heifer and T. I. Magruder, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4694.
    Hosler, an Infant, by his Next Friend v. Street Railway Company.
    (Decided March 31, 1896.)
    Error to the CircuitCourt of Hancock county.

      E. T. Dunn, John Doe and George II Phelps, for plaintiff in error.

      J. A. <& E. V.Bope, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3458.
    Railway Company v. City of Marion.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Marion county.

      W. Z. Davis; S. II Holding, and H II Poppleton, for plaintiff in error.

      D. It. Orissinger, City Solicitor and Scofield, Durfee da Scofield, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3464.
    Bowler et al. v. Pendleton et al.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      Éritt/redge & Wilby, and Matthews db Cleveland, for plaintiffs in error.

      Pamsey, Maxwell db Pamsey, for deféndants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3475.
    Fauber et al. v. Crodes et al.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Gustav A. Laubscher, for plaintiffs in error.

      O. J. Campbell, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3482.
    Railway Company v. Faulkner.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Crawford county.

      A. W. Scott and Finley & Bennett, for plaintiff in error.

      F. S. Monnett, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3850.
    Berringer et al. v. Dukeman, Adm’r.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county.

      W. Z. Sewell, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. W. Coulter and Olds <& Olds, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3893.
    Loftis et al. v. City of Alliance.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      J. W. Grane, for plaintiffs in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No 3981.
    Josse v. Decker.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Miami county.

      ByrJcett <& Gilbert, for plaintiff in error.

      M. H. <& W. D. Jones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed on the authority of Newman v. Becker, Ante, 323.


text:
    No. 3993.
    Wells v. Smith.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Shelby county.

      I). Oldham, and 8. L. Wicoff, for plaintiff in error.

      John F. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4007.
    Lindley et al. v. Lindley et al.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      J. B. Wilson, II. H. Mum and Wilson <& David, for plaintiffs in error.

      A, J. Marvin, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4395.
    Vatter, Admx. v. Railway Company.
    (Decided April 14, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court óf Lucas county.

      James E. Pilliod and Ashton II. Ooldhcvm, for plaintiff in error.

      E. D. Potter, Jr., Thomas Emery and George G. Green, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3829.
    Ruff, By Next Friend, v. Railway Company.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Anderson da Boioman, for plaintiff in error.

      Goulder da Holding, J. B. Knox and John T Dye, for defendant in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court affirmed, it appearing that one ground of reversal was that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The other questions-made were not passed upon.


text:
    No. 3991.
    Stackhouse v. Emmons.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Columbiana county.

      J. M. Dickinson and J. W. Morrison, for plaintiff in error.

      W. G. Wells, Q. S. Speaker and W S. Emmons, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4009.
    State of Ohio v. Commissioners et al.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      B. W. McOaughey and A. A. Thayer, for plaintiff in error.

      Peter J. Collins; Ohmies O. Bow and H. B. Webber, for defendants in error,
   J udgmenkaffirmed.


text:
    No. 4014.
    Leow v. Fry.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Ottawa county.

      Buckland <& Love, for plaintiff in error.

      G. L York, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4016.
    Jones Bros. Electric Company v. The Elektron Manufacturing Company.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county. •,

      Pogue, Pottenger & Pogue, for plaintiff in error.

      A. M. Warmer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4022.
    Osborn & Company v. Egan.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      Kibler <£¡ Kibler, for plaintiffs in error.

      Waldo Taylor, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4031.
    Ebersole v. Krabill, Admr.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Jason Blackford <& Byal and ■ J. V. Jones for plaintiff in error.

      A. Blackford and A. J, Stackhouse, for defendant in error.
   On consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the said circuit court affirming that of the court of common pleas be and the same is hereby reversed with costs. And this court proceeding to render the judgment which the circuit court should have ren- ' dered, it is considered and adjudged that the judgment of the court of common pleas be and is hereby reversed for error in holding the claim set up in the second defense was barred and in instructing the jury to return their verdict.


text:
    No. 4582.
    Hayne v. James et al.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Belmont county.

      W. B. Francis and E. G-. Pratt, for plaintiff in error.

      O. L. Weems, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4617.
    Grant v. Railway Company.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Mahoning county.

      George F. Arrel and Frank Jacobs, for plaintiff in error.

      A. W. Jones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, J., dissents.


text:
    No. 4811..
    Sigafoos, Auditor v. Stockdale.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Setter c§ Robeson, for plaintiff in error.

      Anderson c& Bowmctn, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4876.
    State ex rel. Comerford v. Abbott, Director of Police.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Mandamus.

      A. J. Brims elate, for relator.

      M. J. Norton, for respondant.
   Demurrer to answer overruled and peremptory writ refused.


text:
    No. 4877.
    State ex rel. Andrew v. Abbott Director of Police.
    (Decided April 21, 1896.)
    Mandamus.

      Mconly Tello, for relator.

      M. J. Norton, for respondant.
   Demurrer to answer overruled and peremptory writ refused. :


text:
    No. 3349.
    Hulse et al. v. Hulse.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Pickaway county.

      Lawrence T Weal; A. T. Walling and Henry P. Folsom, for plaintiffs in error.

      Harrison, Olds & Henderson and Smith do Morris, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3365.
    Duroy et al. v. Benton et al.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Estep, Dickey, Carr do Goff, for plaintiffs in error.

      Boynton <& Horr, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3989.
    Willis v. Bateman.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Pike county.

      Gha/rles M. Oaldtoell, for plaintiff in error.

      W H Middleton, for defendant in error.
   .Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4005.-
    June et al. v. City of Fremont.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Sandusky county.
    . James H Fowler, H. B. Buckland and Charles P. Wickham, for plaintiffs in error.

      Bctrtlett <& Wilson, Meek <& Budrow, Garner c& Garner and James Hunt, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed for reasons stated by the circuit court in 8 C. C. Rep., 125; 1 O. Dec., 333.

Spear, J., dissents.


text:
    No. 4017.
    Chicago & Ohio Coal and Car Company v. New Pittsburgh Coal Company.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Athens county.

      Monk <& Elliott and L. M. Jetoett, for plaintiff in • error.

      Grosnenor, Jones. & Worsted, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4023.
    Goheen Manufacturing Company v. Frank et al.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.
    Error to the Circuit Court of Stark county.

      Bay, Lynch c& Bay, for plaintiff in error.

      Granger <& Granger, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Armstrong v. Brewing Co., 53 Ohio St., 467.


text:
    No. 4030.
    Ross, Sheriff, et al. v. Carter et al.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      L. J. Gritchfleld, for plaintiffs inerror.

      Edmond B. Billon, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed upon the grounds stated in the opinion of the circuit court, 8 C. C. Rep., 139 1 O. Dec., 341.


text:
    No. 4032.
    Traucht v. Watson.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Jason Blackford c& Byal, for plaintiff in error.

      W. W. Shuler <& A. Blackford, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, one of the grounds of reversal by the circuit court being that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. Other questions not pdssed upon.


text:
    No. 4049.
    Jones, Witter & Company v. Stauffer.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      Poioell, Ricketts <& Black, Johnson <& Taylor and S. F. Goe, for plaintiffs in error.

      McClure <& Smyser, for defendant in error.
   . J udgment affirmed on the authority of Francisco v. Ryan, ante, 307.


text:
    No. 4059.
    Trustees of Otterbein University v. Sutton, Adm’r.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Seney & Sayler and J. M. Bever, for plaintiffs in error.

      McOauley & Weller, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, one of the grounds of reversal of the circuit court being that the judgment of the common pleas is against the weight of the evidence. Other questions not passed upon.


text:
    No. 4078.
    Grove et al. v. Moyer.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county.

      Anderson <& Bowman, for plaintiffs in error.
    Glyde, McPherson dfc.Davy, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed,'one of the grounds of reversal being that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. Other questions not passed upon.


text:
    No. 4080.
    The Fraternal Mystic Circle v. Young.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Follett <& Kelley and W. TP. Shuler, for plaintiff in error.

      M. D. Shafer and A. Blackford, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Newman v. Becker, ante, 323.


text:
    No. 4333.
    Sikes v. Commissioners.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Scioto county.

      Bannon <& Bannon, for plaintiff in error.

      John C. Milner, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4824.
    State ex rel. Ampt v. Bader et al.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    . Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      F. O. Ampt and Theodore Horstman, for plaintiff in error.

      Spiegel, Foraker & Rendigs, County Solicitors; James E. Robinson and Olement Bates, for defendants in error.
   Judgment of the circuit and common pleas courts reversed on the authority of Hixson v. Burson, ante, 470.


text:
    No. 4825.
    State ex rel. Ampt v. Bader et al.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      F. G. Ampt and Iheodore Horstman, for plaintiff in error.

      Spiegel, Foraker and Rendigs,: County Solicitors; James E. Robinson and Clement Bates, for defendants in error.
   Judgments of the circuit and common pleas courts reversed on the authority of Hixson v. Burson, ante, 470.


text:
    No. 4851.
    State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Moore.
    (Decided April 8, 1896.)
    Quo Warranto.

      Frank 8. Monnett, Attorney General, for plaintiff in error.

      John David Jones and Fdrwa/rd Kibler, for defendant in error.
   Demurrer overruled and judgment for the defendant.


text:
    No. 4852.
    State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Crilly.
    (Decided April 28, 1896.)
    Quo Warranto.

      Frank 8. Monnett, Attorney General, for plaintiff.

      John Dcovid Jones and Fdwa/rd Kibler, for defendant.
   Demurrer overruled and judgment for defendant.


text:
    No. 3488.
    Railway Company v. Stewart, Adm’r.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Huron county.

      G. P. Wickham,, for plaintiff in error.

      G. T c& G. H. Steivart, and 8. A. Wildman, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Burket, Shauck and Spear, JJ., dissent.

The trial court permitted counsel for plaintiff below, against the objection of opposite counsel, to read, in the hearing of the jury, comments of this court in 49 Ohio St. Report, 25, upon the facts as shown at a previous trial of this case. This was error for which the judgment should be reversed.


text:
    No. 3491.
    American Tube & Iron Company v. City of Greenville.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Darke county. .

      T. W. Sanderson and Sater ds Bobeson, for plaintiff in error.

      J. B. Knox, George A. Jobes and L. F. limbert, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall and Spear, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 3494.
    Rowand et al . v. Rowand.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clark county.

      George Arthur, for plaintiffs in error.

      Keifer ds Keifer, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3650.
    Railroad Company v. Roos, Adm’r.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Estep, Dickey, Carr ds Goff, for plaintiff in error.

      Kerruish, Chapman ds Kerruish, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4004.
    Swartz v. Board of Commissioners.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Wayne county.

      John Mg Sweeney and Hiram B. Swartz, for plaintiff in error.

      A. D. Metz, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4025.
    Jones v. Holland.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fayette county.

      Hicky da Patton, for plaintiff in error.

      J. J. Hamper, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4028.
    Foulk v. Boucher.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Putnam county.

      Watts ds Moore and J. Werner, for plaintiff in error.

      Bailey da Bailey, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4029.
    Foulk v. Boucher et al.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Putnam county.

      Watts <& Moore and J. Werner, for plaintiff in error.

      Bailey <&. Bailey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4033.
    Klostermeier v. City of Marietta et al.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Washington county.

      S. 8. Knowles, for plaintiff in error.

      J. G. Brenan, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4034.
    Cadwallader, Executor, v. Schmecker.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.
    ■ Brewer <& Bretoer, J. IT. Platt, and K. W. Miller, for plaintiff in error.

      Noble, Keppel & Noble, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4048.
    Railroad Company v. Mast.
    (Decided. May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      Baldwin <& Shields, for plaintiff in error.

      Rioha/rds doMoCullough, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4076.
    Farwell Company v. McBride Bros.
    (Decided May 5, 1896)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Mansfield c& Long, for plaintiff in error.

      Squire, Saunders d> Dem/psey, and Skiles d¡ Skiles, for defendants in error. ■ .
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4103.
    Inclined Railway v. Doherty, a Minor.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.

      Ramsey, Maxioellds Ramsey, for plaintiff in error.

      O. D. Robertson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4110.
    Carnahan et al. v. Marvin et al.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Whiteley, Pendleton & Whiteley, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. A. & E. V. Bope and A. <& F. P. Blackford, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4111.
    Balsley v. Marvin et al.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      Whiteley, Pendleton, c& Whiteley, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. A. & E. V. Bope and A. <& F. P. Blackford, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4453.
    Springfield Savings Society v. Collett, Treasurer.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Clark county.

      Bowman & Boioman and Osean- T. Martin, for plaintiff in error.

      Chase Stewart, W. A. Scott and N. E. Wan-wick, for defendant in error.
   Upon rehearing the judgment is affirmed.

Bcjrket, Spear and Shauck, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 4848.
    The State v. Warren.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Exceptions of the Prosecuting Attorney to the rulings of the Court of Common Pieas of Athens county.

      J. P. Wood, Prosecuting Attorney, for plaintiff.

      E. D. Sayre, for defendant.;
   Exceptions overruled on the authority of Bragg v. Colwell, 19 Ohio St., 407; Pavey v. Pavey, 30 Ohio St., 600; 36 Ohio St., 199.

Minshall and Spear, JJ., dissent.


text:
    No. 4940.
    McClain v. McKisson, Mayor, et al.
    (Decided May 5, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      Hoyt, Dustin & Kelley, for plaintiff in error.

      Miner G. Norton and Phillips, Ford <& Growl, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3508.
    Patten v. National Benefit Association
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      John O. Winship, for plaintiff in error.

      Williamson <& Cushing, for defendant in error
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3512.
    Ward et al. v. Robinson.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fairfield county.

      Brasee <& Brasee, O. D. Ma/rtin and M. A. Daugherty, for plaintiffs in error.

      John G. Beeves and William Davidson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3516.
    Winshop v. Green.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      John O. Winshi/p, for plaintiff in error.

      W. II. Bolhamus, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3521.
    Purcell v. Davis, Executor, et al.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Muskingum county.

      Ohm-les M. Ycmdenbarh, for plaintiff in error.

      Frank A. Dwrban ,&ndFdga/r W. Allen, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4037.
    Columbian Printing Company v. Snider’s Sons Company.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      L. G. Byrne and O.B. Gilmore, for plaintiff: in error.

      Merrick db Thompson, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Spear, J., dissents.


text:
    No. 4097.
    Ginther, Adm’r, v. Robb et al.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Summit county.

      J. M. Poulson, for plaintiff: in error.

      Preusser db Wennemcmn and Voris db Baird, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4112.
    United States Carriage Company v. Ford, Sheriff, et al.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      Swartz db Allen, for plaintiff in error.

      Gcvrl Norpell and J. M. Dennis, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4135.
    Kuebeler & Company v. Mutchler et al.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hancock county.

      John Sheridan, for plaintiff in error.

      B. II. Rickard and Anderson c& Garabin, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4167.
    Paulding Deposit Bank v. Murphy et al.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Paulding county.

      Seiders <& Seiders, for plaintiff in error.

      Snook c& Wilcox, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4170.
    Giblin v. Leach.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error 'to the Circuit Court of Jackson county.

      Elmer G. Poioell, 'for plaintiff in error.

      A. Leach and Tripp c& Tripp, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4184.
    Buchanan, Adm’r, v. Gates et al, Ex’rs.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit. Court of Monroe county.

      Mg Gammon do Betterer and L. K. Mate, for plaintiff in error.

      Mallory d Jeffers, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4962.
    State ex rel. Weaver v. Board of Electors.
    (Decided May 12, 1896.)
    In Mandamus.

      W. L. Sexoelland Kerr do La .Doto, for relator.

      T. B. Bobinson, Jenner, Jenner do Weldon andSrmxbel Marriott, for respondent.
   Demurrer to answer sustained and peremptory writ refused.


text:
    No. 3526.
    Newbegin v. Pullman Palace Car Company.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Defiance county.

      Henry Newbegin and J. P. Gameron, for plaintiff in error.

      W. II. Rubba/rd and John W. Winn, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4055.
    Crabbs v. Crabbs et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896. )
    Error to the Circuit Court of Richland county.

      Donnell <& Marriott, for plaintiff in error

      Sidles <& Sidles, for defendants in error.
   The judgment of reversal is affirmed, and the judgment rendered after the reversal is reversed and caused remanded for a new trial.


text:
    No. 4161.
    English et al. v. Arnold et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to .the Circuit Court of Tuscarawas county.

      A. W. Patrick and Neely <& Patrick, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. W. Yeagley and E. M. Bailey, for defendants in error.
   Judgment of the circuit court reversed and that of the common pleas affirmed.


text:
    No. 4180.
    Lea v. Ropers et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Ottawa county.

      Homer Goodwin and Pratt <& Wilson, for plaintiff in error.

      II. A. Magruder, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Swartz v. Leist, 13 Ohio St., 419.


text:
    No. 4189.
    Brinkman v. Coate.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Miami county.

      Byrhett <& Gilbert, for plaintiff in error.

      Long <& Kyle, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4190.
    Haviland et al. v. City of Columbus et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      K. L. Dewitt and O. B. Gherrington, for plaintiffs in error.

      G. II. Bar gar, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed, and judgment for plaintiffs in error as per consent entry.


text:
    No. 4191.
    McClerg v. City of Columbus et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      K. L. Dewitt and O. S. Gherrington, for plaintiff in error.

      G. H. Bar gar, for defendants in error.
   Judgment reversed, and judgment for plaintiff in error as per consent entry.


text:
    No. 4198.
    Boyer et al. v. Kintz et al.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Seneca county.

      Lutes do Lutes and Bohn do Baker, for plaintiffs in error.

      Beney <& Saylev, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4208.
    Cory v. Sharp.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Fayette county.

      L>. L. Worthington, II. M. Daugherty and A. B. Creamer, for plaintiff in error.

      J. W. Mooney and Van Deman do Chaffin, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed, one of the grounds of reversal 'being that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The other questions not passed upon.


text:
    No. 4210.
    Reynolds v. Walker.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Morrow county. ■

      Mitchell c& Bruce, for plaintiff in error.

      Olds do Olds, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4321.
    Marsh et al. v. Poston & Company.
    (Decided May 19, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Athens county.

      L. A. Noons, O. W. II. Wright, George B. Okey and James A. Allen, for plaintiffs in error.

      L. II. Jewett and Grosvenor, Jones cfe Worstell, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.

Minshall, J., dissents.


text:
    No. 3529.
    Kuhner et al. v. Naylor et al.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Lawrence county.

      Johnson c§ Booth, for plaintiffs in error.

      II. 8. Neal and Bal/ph Leete, for defendants in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 3781.
    Lloyd, Trustee, v. Western National Bank.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Superior Court of Cincinnati.

      II. P. Lloyd, for plaintiff in error.

      Harmon, Golston, Goldsmith efe Hoadly, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4015.
    Flory et al. v. Voglemier.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Licking county.

      J. A. Flory, for plaintiffs in error.

      J. B. Jones, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4075.
    Goodman v. Black.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Ashland county.

      G. J. Kenny and II. A. Myfoxmtz, for plaintiff in error.

      W. T. Devor and J. 8. Wertman, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4148.
    Paine et al. v. Norton.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Geauga county.

      If. II Bostwick, for plaintiffs in error.

      Metcalfe c& King, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4159.
    Chaney v. Cannon, Radebaugh & Company.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Franklin county.

      Pickering <& Pickering, and Dusenbury do Crosby, for plaintiff in error.

      Edmund B. Dillon, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    No. 4796.
    Shields, Treasurer, v. Topliff.
    (Decided May 26, 1896.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

      P. II. Kaisw and J. O. Winshirp, for plaintiff in error.

      Boynton dé Ilorr, for defendant in error.
   Judgment affirmed on the authority of Hunter, Treas., v Borck, 51 Ohio St., 320.