Case ID: ohio-law-abs_19/html/0615-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By THE COURT", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DARKE COUNTY FARMERS LEAF TOBACCO CO v ROBESON
    Ohio Appeals, 2nd Disfc, Darke Co
    No 418.
    Decided April 18, 1935
    James A. White, Columbus, Billingsley & Manix. Greenville, a'nd Jesse E. Brumbaugh, Gi'ernville, for plaintiff.
    Murphy & Staley, Greenville, for defendant.
   OPINION

By THE COURT

However, we think the conclusions and findings of the master commissioner are as near correct as is humanly possible to make.

One question of law raised by counsel for plaintiff in error requires some mention. The master commissioner divided the costs fifty-fifty between plaintiff and defendant. It is urged that the costs should follow the judgment. In an action at law, this rule would be applicable. In an action in equity it does not necessarily follow, while generally the rule of law is followed. The master commissioner recites the situation under which he thinks it proper that the costs be divided. We are in accord with the master in this conclusion. The exceptions to the master commissioner’s report filed by both plaintiff and defendant will be overruled and the report confirmed. Entry may be drawn accordingly.

KUNKLE, PJ, BARNES and HORNBECK, JJ, concur.