Trustees of Canaan Tp. v. Board of Infirmary Directors
| Decision Date | 21 January 1890 |
| Citation | 23 N.E. 492,46 Ohio St. 694 |
| Parties | TRUSTEES OF CANAAN TP. v. BOARD OF INFIRMARY DIRECTORS. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Motion to dismiss cause, on the ground that it was not commenced in time.
Syllabus by the Court
Any judgment or final order rendered before section 6723, Rev. St., as amended March 28, 1889, took effect, (October 1, 1889,) may be reviewed on a proceeding in error commenced within two years from the time the judgment or order was rendered.
James H. Beebe , for plaintiff in error.
Olds, Fluckey & Baxter , for defendant in error.
At the May term, 1889, of the circuit court of Morrow county, to-wit, on the 25th of May, the defendant in error recovered a judgment, in a proceeding in mandamus , against the plaintiff in error, to reverse which judgment the plaintiff in error commenced its proceeding in this court, December 30, 1889. On March 28, 1889, the legislature adopted an act repealing and amending section 6723, Rev. St., (86 Ohio Laws, 167,) reducing the time in which proceedings may be commenced ‘ to reverse, vacate, or modify a judgment or final order’ from two years to six months. The amended section contains no provision making it applicable to ‘ causes of action, prosecution, or proceeding’ existing at the time of the amendment or repeal. It provides, however, that it shall take effect from and after October 1, 1889. Held, that the repealed section continued in force until the section as amended took effect, October 1, 1889; and that as the plaintiff in error had the right, before the amendment took effect, to prosecute proceedings in error at any time within two years from the time judgment was rendered against it, the taking effect of the statute, as amended on October 1, 1889, did not affect this right. Rev. St. § 79; Lafferty v. Shinn, 38 Ohio St. 46; Bode v. Welch, 29 Ohio St. 19; State v. Rabbitts, 46 Ohio St. 178, 19 N.E. 437. Motion overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. Bunce
...allowed for commencing a proceeding in error in this case. It may have no application at all. See, § 112-104, R. S. 1931; Canaan Twp. v. Board, 46 Ohio St. 694; 23 N.E. 492; Rolater v. Strain, 31 Okla. 58, 119 992; 3 C. J. 1042. If it has any application, we think it does not limit the time......
-
Cox v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
...not take effect until the other provisions of the repealing act come into operation.' " See, also, Trustees of Canaan Twp. v. Bd. of Infirmary Directors (1889), 46 Ohio St. 694, 23 N.E. 492. Modern commentators have endorsed the proposition that a repealer and the amendatory enactment take ......
-
Rolater v. Strain
...et al., 14 Minn. 526 (Gil. 398); Gompf et al. v. Wolfinger et al., 67 Ohio St. 144, 65 N.E. 878; Trustees of Canaan Township v. Board of Infirmary Directors, 46 Ohio St. 694, 23 N.E. 492. ¶3 The motion to dismiss is accordingly overruled. ¶4 All the Justices concur. ...
-
Jackman v. Atchison
...et al., 14 Minn. 526 (Gil. 398); Gompf et al. v. Wolfinger et al., 67 Ohio St. 144, 65 N. E. 878; Trustees of Canaan Township v. Board of Infirmary Directors, 46 Ohio St. 694, 23 N. E. 492.” Other authorities to the same effect will be found in the note to the case of Wilson v. Kryger, 51 L......