Case ID: ohio-law-abs_5/html/0279-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HAMILTON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 322
    CLARK v. CLARK
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist., Hamilton Co.
    Decided June 7, 1926
    18. ACCOUNTING — In case where plaintiff lived as wife of decedent a suit in account of moneys in bank will fail when evidence shows no ownership in wife.
    First Publication of this Opinion
    Attorneys — Harry Hess for Henry Clark; Kilgarriff & Kilgarriff for Lizzie Clark; all of Cincinnati.
   HAMILTON, J.

Lizzie K. Clark brought suit in the Hamilton -Common Pleas against Alfred Clark, administrator of the estate' of Henry Clark deceased. In the petition it was alleged that Henry Clark entered into a pretended marriage with Lizzie Clark although he was married at the time, and as a result thereof they lived in the status of man and wife, and at various times deposited money in the bank in decedent’s name which was from the earnings of both. Further she says she does not know the amount and asks for an accounting and an injunction to restrain the paying out of the moneys.

Judgment was rendered in favor of Lizzie Clark and error is prosecuted here to reverse that judgment. The Court of Appeals held:

1. The evidence shows that she cohabited with decedent as husband and wife, that she did some small daily engagement for which she was paid $2.50 per day, that she did give decedent some money but there is nothing to show what the husband did with the money.

2. From the bill of exceptions there is no evidence tending to prove ownership in the funds deposited in the name of deceased, found to his credit, and taken charge of by administrator.

Judgment reversed.

(Buchwalter, PJ., and Cushing, J., concur.)