Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0733-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "¡ULLIVAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 747
    COLE v. JENKINS
    Ohio Appeals, 8th District, Cuyahoga County
    No. 4545.
    September 24, 1923
    'his opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
    5A. BILLS, NOTES AND CHECKS.
    Judgment on a note made to show to and appease tockholders, then to be cancelled, was without consideration — Judgment on reversed.
    Attorneys — A. H. Fiebach, for defendant; J. B. workin, for plaintiff.
   ¡ULLIVAN, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Suit on a note for $3,300 which was executed by efendant and delivered to plaintiff’s decedent for re purpose of exhibiting to and appeasing certain ■tackholders of a corporation. No consideration ^¡sed from the payee to the maker. The defense as no consideration and an agreement of eancella-on between maker and payee. The Common Pleas ireeted a verdict for plaintiff. Defendant prose-rted error to this court. Held:

Since there was no consideration for the note sub-tantial justice has not been done. The judgment i against the weight of the evidence and contrary > law. Reversed and remanded.