Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0613-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "VICKERY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 641
    GENTSCH v. BEVILLE et al
    Ohio Appeals, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County
    No. 4563.
    Decided June 18, 1923
    This opinion has not been published except in Abstract
    PARTITION — No reason to complain — Error would benefit plaintiff in error.
    (Note: The opinion fails to state what the alleged errors were and does not state reasons for affirming the judgment.)
    Attorneys — Gentsch, Rawson & Kavanagh, F. F. Truhler, J. A. Nieding, for Gentsch; J. B. Oviatt and Tyler & Kursenberger and Schultz and B. C. Boer, for Beville et al.
   VICKERY, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Gentsch brought an action in partition against Beville and others in Cuyahoga Common Pleas. A building had been erected on real estate sought to be partitioned. Certain lien holders filed cross-petitions. From the judgment, Wilmont Co. appealed and Gentsch prosecuted error. By agreement Wil-mot Co. was allowed a lien for $500 and the appeal was dismissed. The Guardian Savings and Trust Co. claimed a large sum of money that they had put into the building but Gentsch was favored in most particulars by the entry in the lower court. Itowever, Gentsch was not satisfied and prosecuted fc’or. The Court of Appeals in affirming judgment eld:

1.Mr. Gentsch had no reason to complain. If there is any error anywhere it would be to his benefit and not to his detriment.