Case ID: ohio-law-abs_8/html/0304-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      RICHARDS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PRUNKLE v DRZEWIECKI
    Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Luacs Co
    No 2323.
    Decided March 17, 1930
    Marion W. Bacóme, Toledo, for Prunkle.
    Stanley A. Konczal, Toledo, for Drzewiecki.
   RICHARDS, J.

Under the state of the evidence in this case it is apparent that summons was never served on John Prunkle in any manner and that he had no knowledge of the bringing or pendency of the action until long after the judgment was rendered, and has not had his day in court on the original action.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Williams and Lloyd, JJ., concur.